LIBRARY OF CONGRESS, 

Chap. Co]>ym^it No. 

ShelLm/.f^c^ 



UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. 



THE GREAT TRIAL 



OF THE 



Nineteenth Century 



SAMUEL C. PARKS, A.M. 



Kansas City, Mo. : 

HUDSON-KIMBERLY PUBLISHING CO. 

1900. 



50024 

Libpsuy of ConareasJ 

■'WO Copies Keceived 
SEP 21 1900 

Copyright Mtry 
S£a^N?^ COPY. 

l)«'tivw«rt to 

OhOt^ DIVISION, 
JCT 3 3 19nn 






Copyright 1900, by 

CHARLES K. WILES. 

All Rights Reserved. 



CONTENTS. 



Page 

Preface . ; 5 

Dedication "V 

Trial 11 

Speech of Aristides 17 

Speech of Alfred the Great. ...»-. 20 

Speech of Cincinnatus 23 

Speech of Mr. Clay 24 

Speech of Gen. Grant 39 

Speech of Mr. Jefferson 47 

Speech of Mr. lyincoln 50 

Speech of Lafayette • 69 

Speech of Mr. Madison 75 

Speech of Count Tolstoi 92 

Speech of Gen. Washington 102 

Speech of Bishop Simpson 104 

Conclusion H^ 

Appendix 121 

Intemperance in Manila 121 

Webster on the Mexican War 126 

Extracts from Speech of Mr. Clay, 1818 135 



PKEf ACE BY THE PUBLISHERS. 

The author of this book, Samuel 0. Parks, was born in 
Middlebury, Vermont, in 1820. Was educated at the Indi- 
ana State University, and located in Springfield, Illinois, in 
1840, and while a young man he became acquainted with 
Mr. Lincoln and was always his ardent admirer and close 
personal and political friend. He was a member of the Illi- 
nois Legislature in 1855. Was a delegate from the Spring- 
field district (Illinois) to the first Republican National Con- 
vention, held in Philadelphia in 1856, when Fremont was 
nominated for President. Was at the Republican National 
Convention held in Chicago in 1860, and assisted in nominat- 
ing Mr. Lincoln for President. He was appointed associate 
justice of the Supreme Court of Idaho by President Lincoln 
in 1862. Was on the Grant electoral ticket in Illinois in 
1868. Was a member of the Illinois Constitutional Conven- 
tion in 1870. Was appointed associate justice of the Su- 
preme Court of New Mexico in 1878 by President Hayes. 
Was transferred to the Supreme Court of Wyoming in 1882 
by President Arthur. 



PREFACE. 

In the preface to his treatise on International Law, 
William E. Hall says: "Since it has come into existence, it 
has often been quietly ignored or brutally disregarded." 
The history of the world from the time of Grotius, "the 
father of International Law," to the present day proves this 
to be true. Nearly every great nation has violated that law, 
"quietly" or "brutally." Great Britain has perhaps been 
more guilty than any other nation. That the United States 
has been guilty of the same offense within the last two 
years is shown by the speeches in this book. 

From about one to three pages of the speeches herein 
ascribed to Mr. Clay, Gen. Grant, Mr. Lincoln, Mr. Madison, 
Count Tolstoi, and Bishop Simpson, respectively, are taken 
almost literally from their published works. And all of the 
sentiments and opinions ascribed to the twelve speakers are 
believed to be in harmony with their respective characters, 
and to correspond with what they have either done, said, or 
written. 

The greater part of the book was written six months 
ago. Its completion and publication have been unavoidably 
delayed till the present time. 

June, 1900. 



DEDICATION TO ABRAHAM LENOOLN. 

In the summer of the year 1860, at my request and for 
me, you examined and corrected a biography of yourself 
which I wished to use in the pending presidential campaign. 

Nothing in that book was of more interest and import- 
ance than that part of your speech in Springfield, on the 
26th day of June, 1860, in which you expressed your view of 
the meaning and object of that part of the Declaration of 
Independence which declares that ''all men are created 
equal." 

In this "view," as given by the book in question, you 
made but one correction, substituting the preposition "in" 
for "with ." This was done three years after the speech was 
written and delivered. So that "view" is your well-con- 
sidered and deliberate opinion of the most important ques- 
tion affecting the human race, outside of its eternal destiny. 

The following is the passage referred to, taken from the 
copy of the speech in the book as it was corrected by you 
for me: 

"I think the authors of that notable instrument in- 
tended to include all men, but they did not intend to declare 
all men equal in all respects. They did not mean to say all 
were equal in color, size, intellect, moral development, or 
social capacity. They defined with tolerable distinctness 
in what respects they did consider all men created equal 
— equal in certain inalienable rights, among which are 'life, 
liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.' This they said. 



8 Dedication to Abraham Lincoln. 

and this they meant. They did not mean to assert the ob- 
vious untruth that all were then actually enjoying that 
equality, nor yet that they were about to confer it imme- 
diately upon them. In fact, they had no power to confer 
such a boon. They meant simply to declare the right, so 
that the enforcement of it might follow as fast as circum- 
stances should permit. 

"They meant to set up a standard maxim for free so- 
ciety, which should be familiar to all, and revered by all; 
constantly looked to, constantly labored for, and even 
though never perfectly attained, constantly approximated, 
and thereby constantly spreading and deepening its influ- 
ence, and augmenting the happiness and value of life to all 
people of all colors everywhere. The assertion that "all 
men are created equal" was of no practical use in effecting 
our separation from Great Britain ; and it was placed in the 
Declaration, not for that, but for future use. Its authors 
meant it to be as — thank God! it is now proving itself — a 
stumbling-block to all those who, in after times, might seek 
to turn a free people back into the hateful paths of despot- 
ism. They knew the proneness of prosperity to breed ty- 
rants, and they meant when such should reappear in this 
fair land and commence their vocation, they should find left 
for them at least one hard nut to crack." 

This view was the view of the Republican party. It 
was the fundamental principle of your administration, and 
was not seriously questioned for thirty-six years after your 
election as President. Indeed, the fact that your election 
vindicated your view of the Declaration was, as you well 
know, one principal reason why the writer and so many of 
your friends rejoiced in your election. 



Dedication to Abraham Lincoln, 9 

But a great change has taken place in this country 
within the last three years. The attempt which was made 
forty years ago to fritter away the Declaration, and to leave 
it no more, at most, than an interesting memorial of the 
dead past, shorn of its vitality and practical value, and left 
without the germ or even the suggestion of the individual 
rights of man in it, as described by you in the speech re- 
ferred to, has been renewed by men professing to be your 
followers. 

This book is written with the hope that it will tend to 
expose the folly and madness of this second attempt to de- 
stroy the great Declaration of the rights of man. If that 
hope should be realized, it will be a very great gratification. 

The Author, 



THE TRIAL. 

"I had a dream, but 'twas not all a dream." 

— Lord Bifron. 

The thoughts that came into my head upon my bed were 
these : I dreamed that I was on a visit to a strange city, and 
while there, was taken to see a new and great court-house — 
the largest in the world. This building had been erected 
for the use of a new court, which had been created, organ- 
ized, and established recently for the trial of great criminal 
cases. Its jurisdiction extended over all countries and 
through all ages. This great court was now holding its first 
session. The building was situated on a lofty eminence, 
commanding a fine view of all the neighboring country, and 
was surrounded by noble forest trees, a large variety of 
evergreens, and a great abundance of beautiful fiowers. It 
was built of the finest marble, was admirable in its propor- 
tions, workmanship, and finish, and had a larger seating ca- 
pacity than any building, ancient or modern, except the Fla- 
vian amphitheatre. Its acoustic properties were so perfect 
that Mr. Clay could be heard in it by forty thousand people. 

When I entered the court-room, two cases had already 
been disposed of. In one Edward, the Black Prince, son of 
Edward the Third, King of England, had been tried for the 
murder of three thousand men, women, and children, inhab- 
itants of the city of Limoges in France, in the year 1370. The 
facts in this case had been admitted by the defense. 



12 The Great Trial of the 

Mothers, with their infants in their arms, had begged the 
enraged conqueror for the lives of themselves and their chil- 
dren; but he had put them all to death and made their city 
a desolation. 

The only defense the attorneys of the Prince attempted 
was an impassioned appeal to the jury, founded on his 
hitherto high character as a man, and the glory he had won 
for himself and his country by the wonderful victories of 
Cressy and of Poictiers. But the appeal was vain. The jury 
brought in a verdict of "Guilty of murder in the first 
degree." 

The second case tried was an indictment against Na- 
poleon Bonaparte for the murder of five hundred thou- 
sand Egyptians, Spaniards, and Russians, at various times 
charged in the indictment. 

In this case also the facts were admitted. The defend- 
ant had waged wars of invasion and conquest against the 
nations aforesaid, and therein had caused the death of half 
a million of men, including a great many thousands of the 
French. 

A very determined and confident effort was made by 
the defense to prevent a verdict of guilty, by urging upon 
the jury that Napoleon was a great statesman as well as a 
great warrior; that he had done more for the elevation and 
glory of France than any other man that ever lived; and 
that four years' confinement to the island of St. Helena was 
an all-sufl6cient atonement for any evil he may have done. 

But the instructions of the court upon the subject of 
murder were too full and clear to be disregarded by the 
jury, and they brought in a verdict of guilty as charged in 
the indictment. 



Nineteenth Centunj. 13 

All pertaining to the first two trials I learned 
afterwards from a friend who witnessed both. The third I 
saw and heard myself. It was an indictment against Wil- 
liam McKinley for murdering twenty thousand Filipinos 
and two thousand Americans, many of whom were boys be- 
tween sixteen and twenty-one years of age. 

In this case nothing was admitted. The prosecution 
were required to prove their entire case. The defense dis- 
puted every inch of ground. They omitted nothing that 
was admissible as evidence or argument in favor of their 
client. In fact, the high position of the defendant, the cir- 
cumstances and the surroundings, were calculated to rouse 
both parties to almost superhuman efforts. It was the most 
imposing scene I ever witnessed. 

The presiding judge was Chief Justice Marshal, and as- 
sociated with him were John Jay and Chancellor Kent. The 
jury were Aristides of Athens, Cincinnatus of Rome, Lafay 
ette of France, Alfred the Great of England, Count Tolstoi 
of Russia, Presidents Washington, Jefferson, Madison, Lin- 
coln and Grant, Henry Clay and Bishop Simpson. 

The vast audience of more than twenty thousand per- 
sons was composed of men from nearly all countries and all 
ages; nearly every foreign ambassador, nearly every United 
States senator, a majority of the House of Representatives, 
prominent men from every State, and from the adjacent 
country, men from every profession and pursuit. This 
mighty audience was completed and adorned by the largest 
array of intelligent and brilliant women ever assembled un- 
der one roof in the United States. 

The great court-room was crowded when I entered and 



14 The Great Trial of the 

forced my way up to the bar, but at a hint from Mr. Lincoln, 
one of the bailiffs gave me a seat where I could hear and see 
all that was said and done. 

The attorneys for the prosecution were Boutwell of 
Massachusetts, Reed of Maine, Edmonds of Vermont, and 
others of less note. For the defense, Senators Hanna, 
Chandler, Depew and Morgan, Col. Watterson of Kentucky, 
and two or three preachers who, by courtesy, were called 
"Christian ministers." 

It was proved, that "at the time the United States de- 
clared war against Spain, the Filipinos had been fighting 
for liberty and independence for several years, and had 
nearly attained their freedom ; that upon the arrival of the 
United States forces at the Philippine Islands, the Islanders 
became allies of the United States in their war against 
Spain; that at the close of that war the Filipinos still 
claimed their independence and their right to govern them- 
selves, and denied the right which was claimed by the de- 
fendant, as Commander-in-chief of the Army and Navy of 
the United States, to govern them and exercise proprietary 
rights in their country; that, to enforce his claim, the Presi- 
dent made war upon them, and by that war had caused the 
death, in battle and by wounds and disease, of twenty 
thousand Filipinos and two thousand Americans whom 
he had ordered there to fight, and that some of the latter 
were boys under twenty-one years of age." 

The defense was, that "by the treaty of peace with 
Spain the United States had gained the sovereignty of those 
Islands, and that the President could not surrender it; that 
he had a right to enforce his claim to them to the extent of 



Nineteenth Century- 15 

the extermination of the inhabitants if they would not 
otherwise submit to his authority." 

For a further defense it was pleaded that, '*in prosecut- 
ing the war upon the Filipinos, the defendant was seek- 
ing to establish peace, humanity, civilization, and Christian- 
ity among them; that the war was for their own good, and 
no matter how much it cost in blood and treasure, it would 
finally result in peace, prosperity, and happiness." 

For a further defense it was claimed, "that the Uni- 
ted States needed the Islands in their business; that they 
were very, very rich, and would be a source of great profit 
to American speculators, traders, merchants, agriculturists, 
cotton-raisers, and office-holders; that it was the true policy 
of the United States to expand and create a colonial empire 
after the fashion of Great Britain; that it was the manifest 
destiny of the Anglo-Saxon race to control the world; that 
honor and patriotism demanded that the American flag 
should wave to the end of time \^herever it had once been 
planted ; and that to stop the Philippine War \now would 
make our country an object of ridicule for a hundred years." 
The trial lasted several days, the case being very ably 
and thoroughly argued on both sides. The Court was abso- 
lutely impartial. The motto of Chief -Justice Marshal in 
this case, as in the trial of Aaron Burr, was "Fiat jusUtia, 
mat coelum." His instructions covered the whole doctrine 
of murder and were the most admirable specimen of that 
kind of literature I ever heard of read. 

The case was given to the jury at ten o'clock in 
the morning, and at six o'clock in the evening they brought 
in their verdict. George Washington was the foreman. As 
2 



16 The Great Trial of the 

he arose and handed the verdict to the clerk of the court to 
be read his appearance was majestic. All eyes were now 
upon the clerk. The stillness was intense and the interest 
and suspense painful. The verdict was, "Guilty as charged 
in the indictment." 

Up to this time, and during his long trial, the prisoner 
had borne himself with a firmness (perhaps I should rather 
say hardihood) worthy of the man who made that terrible 
speech at Pittsburg, presaging the conquest of the Filip- 
inos. Now, as all eyes were turned to him, upon the read- 
ing of the verdict, he started as if he had received a violent 
electric shock, then turned deadly pale and had to b;^ sup- 
ported in his chair by his attendants. 

A motion for a new trial was made by his attorneys, 
and ten o'clock the following day was set for hearing it, and 
the court adjourned. 

The argument of the motion the next day was lengthy, 
and, upon the part of some of the attorneys for the defense, 
very abusive. The Court took a recess of one hour to con- 
sult, and at the end of that time they returned, overruled 
the motion, and again adjourned. 

Then ensued a most extraordinary scene. Mr. Clay, the 
boldest and most self-reliant public man of this century, 
arose and re(iuested all the people to remain till he made an 
announcement. 

He stated that the trial which had just closed was the 
most important that had ever occured in the history of this 
country. The verdict had been severely criticised and he 
thought the jury owed it to themselves and to the people 



Nineteenth Century- ^^ 

of the United States to make a public statement of the 
grounds of their verdict; he had consulted with the jury 
during the recess, and they all agreed with him, that, as 
there was to be no court to-morrow, they would meet in the 
court-room for that purpose at ten o'clock the next morning. 
At the hour appointed the court-room was, if possible, 
more crowded than during the trial. General ATashington 
was elected president of the meeting, by acclamation; Mr. 
Lincoln vice-president, and Mr. Clay secretary. The presi- 
dent directed the secretary to call the names of the jury in 
alphabetical order, beginning with Aristides. 



SPEECH OF ARISTIDES. 

"It is plain, from the evidence, that the killing in this 
case was done by the order of the defendant; but it is con- 
tended that as it was done in a state of war, it cannot be 
murder. This would be true if the war was just or neces- 
sary, but this war was neither. On the contrary, the cir- 
cumstances under which the war was made aggravate the 
offense, for the Filipinos were, or had been, the allies of 
the Americans in their war against Spain. 

"It has always been my opinion that war never was jus- 
tifiable except in necessary self-defense, such as the wars of 
Greece against Persia, and the wars of America against 
England. Offensive wars alv/ays injured Greece, and the 
Peloponnesian war was ruinous to Athens. It was not 
merely by war that Greece became the admiration of the 
world, and Athens the most wonderful city that ever ex- 



18 The Great Trial of the 

isted; it was more by the success of their great men in the 
works and arts of peace. 

'1 am proud of the heroic deeds of the warriors of m^- 
country, but I am still more proud of those greater exhibi- 
tions of superior mental power which still shine with such 
lustre in the works of her poets, orators, statesmen, and 
sages; and of those edifices and monuments which still attest 
the skill and taste of her artists, architects, and builders. 
Who can tell how much they have done for the civilized 
world in the last two thousand years? Bright was the glory 
and green were the laurels which they won at Marathon, 
Salamis, and Plataea; but dim is that glory and faded 
are those laurels when compared with the honors and bless- 
ings which will ever rest on the poets and orators, philoso 
phers and statesmen of my native land. 

''My countryman Themistocles was a man of superior 
genius, and rendered great services to his country in the 
Persian war, and the failure of the fearful invasion of 
Xerxes was, in large measure, due to him; but he was am- 
bitious, selfish, and corrupt. After the defeat of the Persians 
at Marathon and Salamis, and when Xerxes had retreated to 
Persia, Themistocles proposed to the Athenians to destroy 
the ships of their allies, and thus secure the naval suprem- 
acy of Athens. The Athenians rejected the proposal as un- 
just and perfidious, and they were clearly right in so doing. 

"In the present case, the defendant has done worse 
with the allies of the Americans in the war against Spain 
than Themistocles proposed to do with the allies of the 
Athenians. He has attempted to appropriate their country 
to the use of the Americans, unjustly; and, because they re- 



Nineteenth Century. 1 9 

fused to yield to his demands (as they had a perfect right to 
do), he has caused thousands of them to be slaughtered. In 
my opinion this was a clear case of wholesale murder. The 
verdict was right in itself, and necessary to deter other 
rulers from similar crimes," 

The next speaker was Alfred the Great. Of this prince 
it has been said: ''He lived solely for the good of his 
people. He is the first instance in the history of Christen- 
dom of the Christian king; of a ruler who put aside every 
personal aim or ambition, to devote himself to the welfare 
of those whom he ruled. So long as he lived he strove 'to 
live worthily'; but in his mouth a life of worthiness meant 
a life of justice, temperance, self-sacrifice. The Peace of 
Wedmore at once marked the temper of the man. Ardent 
warrior as he was, with a disorganized England before him, 
he set aside, at thirty-one, the dream of conquest, to leave 
behind him the memory, not of victories, but of 'good works,' 
of daily toils, by which he secured peace, good government, 
education for his people. His policy was one of peace." 

This is a very high eulogy, but it is just and true. In 
the moral grandeur of his character, Alfred never had an 
equal among the kings of England, and perhaps never had 
a superior among the rulers of the world in all countries 
and all ages. And who is that ruler now living (if any) 
who, in this respect, is his equal ? 



20 The Great Trial of the 



SPEECH OF ALFRED THE GREAT. 

The appearance of Alfred created great interest, and his 
remarks made a deep impression upon the andience. 

He said that his experience in war had been so long and 
so severe that he had very decided convictions on that sub- 
ject. When he came to the throne of England his country 
long had been, and then was, subject to the incursions of 
the Danes, who made frequent and destructive invasions 
and wars against his people. He was forced to fight them 
for years, to save his countrymen from utter ruin. At one 
time they pressed him so hard that he was obliged to seek 
safety in a little island in a swamp and remain concealed 
for a year. At last he succeeded in quietly raising a new 
army, defeated the Danes in a great battle, besieged them 
in their camp, and reduced them to the last extremity. He 
then gave them their lives and liberty upon condition that 
they would settle in and cultivate that part of the kingdom 
which they had laid waste and depopulated and be- 
come quiet, useful, and Christian people. This they agreed 
to do, and, to their credit be it spoken, they gave him but 
little trouble for many years. (This is what historians call 
"The Peace of Wedmore.") This settlement with the Danes 
gave him the opportunity to improve his own people in all 
the works of peace, and to devote himself to science, learn- 
ing, and law; to restore order, educate his countrymen, and 
to encourage men of learning, wisdom, and piety. 

The Anglo-Saxons and the Danes were very ignor- 
ant and brutal, and he esteemed what he did to raise them 
from their low intellectual and moral debasement of far 



Nineteenth Century. 21 

more value to his country than his services in war. In or- 
der to educate his people, he was obliged to improve himself 
in science and literature, and he had come to the conclusion 
that education was the noblest work in which man or wo- 
man could engage. He said : 

"It was much easier to subdue the Danes than to con- 
quer the ignorance of the Saxons, the Angles, and the Jutes, 
who bj brute force had driven out the ancient Britons and 
taken possession of their country. 

"Nearly all wars are the offspring of ignorance and ra- 
pacity. It was the rapacity of the English kings and the ig- 
norance of the English people that caused the Hundred 
Years' War to conquer France. Besotted by ignorance, 
poverty, and vice, the deluded people did not know any bet- 
ter than to desire this conquest, and they committed fearful 
crimes and cruelties to that end, although themselves, 
as well as the rulers whom they followed and obeyed, were 
nominally Christians. They were too ignorant and brutal 
to realize the wickedness and cruelty of their invasion of 
and rtfv^ages in the country of another professedly Christian 
people; and it might be said with truth, as a reason for for- 
giving them, ^They know not what they do.' 

"The war against the Philippines was very much like 
the war of the Anglo-Saxons against the ancient Britons, in 
its origin and objects. The Saxons and Britons had been 
allies in a war against the Picts and Scots, and had driven 
those fierce marauders out of Britain. The Saxons then de- 
manded the country of the Britons for themselves, and, be- 
cause the Britons refused to yield to their demand, waged a 



22 The Great Trial of the 

war of extermination against them, conquered them, and 
took possession of their country. The people who commit- 
ted this atrocity have always been considered robbers and 
murderers, and the English historians call them 'pirates.' 

"In like manner the Americans and the Filipinos had 
been allies in the war against Spain. At the end of the war, 
the rulers of America demanded the Philippine Islands for 
themselves; and, when their demand was refused, the 
defendant in this case made war upon them and committed 
the crimes charged in the indictment. 

"If the people of the United States who favor the war 
made by the defendant really believe in it, they need educa- 
tion in the ways of truth and justice as much as those re 
mote Anglo-Saxon ancestors from whom they are said to be 
descended. 

"I will leave with the speakers who are to follow me to 
answer the many defenses and excuses which have been 
made for this war. There was one, however, so remarkable 
that I will notice it. It was said that such wars always had 
been and always would be. And, to support this argument, 
the saying of Solomon had been quoted to this effect: 'The 
thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and 
that which is done is that which shall be done.' 

"If this reasoning is good to sustain one evil, it is good 
to sustain many others. Its general adoption and applica- 
tion would prevent any improvement in morals, or any 
amelioration of the condition of the mass of mankind. The 
better doctrine is that whatever 'has been' that is wrong 
should be righted; and that neither time, nor custom, nor 
authority can 'blazon evil deeds, or consecrate a crime.' 



Nineteenth Century. 23 

'The war against the Filipinos was a crime; the 
deaths caused by it were properly charged to the author of 
that war, and were correctly characterized in the indict- 
ment as murder. The verdict should be sustained by the 
people, as it has been by the Court, and all such wars should 
be put under the universal ban of the civilized world." 



SPEECH OF GINCINNATUS. 

Cincinnatus said that he had been obliged to leave his 
farm twice and go to war, but he had done so with reluct- 
ance, and as soon as the emergency was over, gladly re- 
turned to his plow. That he was opposed to all wars of ag- 
gression and conquest as unnecessary, criminal, and ulti- 
mately ruinous to the country that made them, though at 
first apparently an advantage. Such wars had ruined Rome. 
The spoils of the conquered nations corrupted the Romans, 
made them luxurious, profligate, and brutal, and an easy 
prey to the barbarians of the North. War is the worst oc- 
cupation of human life, and farming is the best. The first 
is for the destruction of the human family, and the last for 
its preservation. He would advise every soldier to leave 
the army as soon as he could and go to farming or 
some other useful employment. He continued : 

"It may be true, as Alfred says, that the work of educa- 
tion is the noblest employment of man, but few soldiers are 
capable of becoming teachers. General Washington set an 
excellent example to his countrymen after the close of the 
Revolutionary War, in resigning his commission, retiring to 



24 The Great Trial of the 

his farm, and engagiug iu its ciiltivatiou and improvement. 
General William Henry Harrison did the same after the War 
of 1812. It would tend to the betterment of society if half 
of the prominent military men of the world and three- 
fourths of the rank and file of all its armies would follow 
the example of Washington, Harrison, and myself: engage 
in the noble pursuits of agriculture, in producing from the 
earth the means of sustenance and of procuring the neces- 
saries and comforts of life. The world needs no wars and 
not many soldiers, and the day is coming when he will be 
esteemed the greatest patriot and philanthropist who has 
done the most to put an end to war. 

''In this case the plea that the defendant killed the 
Filipinos and the Americans in war is no defense, for he 
made the war, knowing and intending that result, and for 
the purpose of acquiring territory to which he had no right, 
and of making serfs of a people who had been fighting for 
many years to be free and to govern themselves, and who 
had nearly attained their freedom." 



SPEECH OF MR. CLAY. 

Mr. Clay was the next speaker. He has been described 
by Mr. Seward as "the greatest, the most reliable, and the 
most faithful of all our statesmen." The great interest 
which his appearance excited was intensified as he pro- 
ceeded, and he held the vast audience for more than an 
hour, as if bound by a spell. He said: 

"I regard the questions growing out of the war with 



Nineteenth Centm^. 25 

the Filipinos as the most important that I have ever 
been called upon to consider. The doctrines advocated by 
the President — the author of that war — and by his defend- 
ers, are utterly subversive of the principles upon which 
this government was founded. I thank God that He has per- 
mitted me to address my countrymen on this great occasion, 
and I invoke His blessing upon my effort, and humbly im- 
plore Him to lend to His unworthy servant the power, in- 
tellectual, moral, and physical, to rouse my countrymen to 
immediate, determined, and successful opposition to such 
pernicious and destructive principles." 

Mr. Clay had an eagle eye, a voice of amazing sweet- 
ness and power, and a commanding presence and manner. 
No one could doubt his entire sincerity, and this exordium 
which I have given so brieflj' and imperfectly, and this ap 
peal to the Almighty for aid b^^ the most self-reliant and 
imperious orator in the world, had an effect which I will not 
attempt to describe. From this time the audience was, to 
all appearance, entirely en rapport with him. 

"The principal defense in this case," Mr. Clay continued, 
"was, 'that the killing,' done by order of the President, 'in 
the Philippine Islands was done in war'; but that is no de- 
fense unless the war was necessary. A nation, or rather 
the commander-in-chief of the forces of a nation, has no 
more right to kill a thousand or ten thousand men in an un- 
necessary war than an individual has to kill another indi- 
vidual without sufficient cause. Nations are but collections 
of individuals. They pursue the same objects, are governed 
by the same motives, and are amenable to the same moral 
laws; and the moral guilt of murder attaches to every na- 



26 The Great Trial of the 

tiou, or to the executive of any nation, for the death of 
every man who is deliberately killed, on either side, in any 
war which that nation or its executive has unjustly made. 

"War is one of those dreadful scourges that so shakes 
the foundations of society, overturns or changes the char- 
acter of governments, interrupts or destroys the pursuits of 
private happiness — in short, brings misery and wretchedness 
in so many forms, and at last, in its issue, is so doubtful and 
hazardous that nothing but dire necessity can justify an ap- 
peal to arms. 

"War is the voluntary work of our own hands, and 
whatever reproaches it may deserve, should be directed to 
ourselves. When it breaks out, its duration is indefinite and 
unknown, its vicissitudes are hidden from our view. In the 
sacrifice of human life and in the waste of human treasure, 
in its losses and its burdens it affects both belligerent na- 
tions; and its sad effects of mangled bodies, of death and 
desolation, endure long after its thunders are hushed in 
peace. 

"War unhinges society, disturbs its peaceful and regu- 
lar industry, and scatters poisonous seeds of disease and 
immorality which continue to germinate and diffiuse their 
baleful influences long after it has ceased. Dazzling by its 
glitter, pomp, and pageantry, it begets a spirit of wild 
adventure and romantic enterprise, and often disqualifies 
those who embark in it — after their return from the bloody 
fields of battle — from engaging in the peaceful vocations 
of life. Upon the nation itself wars waged for the purpose 
of conquest, to add to its territory, trade, and wealth. 



Nineteenth Century. 27 

are always, sooner or later, destructive of its prosperity 
and happiness. 

"Of all the dangers and misfortunes which could befall 
this nation, I should regard that of its becoming a warlike 
and conquering power the most direful and fatal. History 
tells the mournful tale of conquering nations and conquer- 
ors. Assyria, Babylonia, Chaldea, Media, and Persia were 
all warlike and conquering nations, and all perished by the 
sword. Greece and Macedon took the sword to conquer Per- 
sia, and their great leader, Alexander, founded a more 
mighty empire upon the ruins of the kingdom of Cyrus; but 
he died an early and miserable death, which originated in 
his own great successes and the consequent prostitution 
of his great powers to ignoble ends; and his empire passed 
away like the baseless fabric of a vision. 

"Rome was the great conquering nation of antiquity. 
But the fruit of her conquests, the spoil of the nations, 
enriched, corrupted, enervated, and debased her; and the 
northern barbarians put her to a long, lingering, and igno- 
minious death of more than three hundred years' duration. 

"France, under her great captain. Napoleon, was the su- 
preme conquering power of modern times, but her very suc- 
cess ruined her. 'The demon of conquest allured her too far.' 
She became a suppliant at the feet of assembled Europe for 
her own existence, and has sunk to be a second-rate power 
among the nations. 

"The Anglo-Saxons waged a war of extermination 
against the Britons for one hundred and fifty years, with 
some intervals, and conquered them; but three hundred and 
eighty years after, the Norman punished the Saxon with 



28 The Great Trial of the 

terrible severity for his cruelty to the Briton, and ruled him 
with a rod of iron. Centuries passed away and the Saxons, 
the Danes, and the Normans became blended into one homo- 
geneous people; but still retaining the Saxon characteristic 
propensity for piracy and waging war throughout the world 
upon any weak people from whom they desired to obtain 
territory, trade, or tribute. 

^'Hitherto their insular position has saA'ed them from be- 
ing overrun by any of the great nations of Europe; but the 
time, foretold by Macaulay, when 'some traveler from New 
Zealand, in the midst of a vast solitude, will sketch from a 
broken arch of London Bridge the ruin of St. Paul's,' will 
surely come and may come soon. 

"Spain, in the time of Charles Fifth, was the dominant 
power of Europe — a great, wealthy, conquering, cruel power 
— but for many j-ears she has been on the decline, and to-day 
she is almost contemptible. As a prominent power in the 
world she has perished from her own conquests, avarice, 
corruption, and cruelty. 

"It is the law of this world — proved by the experience 
of three thousand years — that any nation which makes 
an unnecessary and destructive war upon another shall 
herself, sooner or later, be punished for her wickedness. 
Generally the punishment grows out of the original wrong, 
and often it is inflicted in the same form as the original 
wrong. 

"Our war with Mexico was unjust and unconstitutional, 
made by the President of the United States to acquire terri- 
tory for an unrighteous purpose. In that war we murdered 
thousands of Mexicans and at its close took one third of her 



Nineteenth Century. 29 

territory for one-teuth of its value — a mere nominal sum — 
in a vain attempt to cover up the real robbery. Seven- 
teen years afterwards we were punished for that outrage by 
being plunged into a terrible civil war, which grew directly 
out of the question of slavery in the territory acquired from 
Mexico. It is only necessary to allude to the horrors of that 
war. It cost the loss of a million lives, the waste of thous- 
ands of millions of money, and the destruction of thousands 
of millions of property, and filled this land with sorrow and 
mourning. 

'The war against the Filipinos was also commenced 
by the President in the same way as the Mexican War, un- 
justly and unconstitutionally, and in order to deprive those 
people of their liberty and property, and to force upon them 
a foreign government, to which they did not consent, and to 
which they rightfully refused to submit. None of the pre- 
tenses upon which the President made and is carrying on 
this war will bear examination, and some of them are hardly 
worth notice. There is no possible way in which we can ac- 
quire sovereignty over them except by their own consent, 
which they have utterly refused to give from the beginning. 
'They are a part of the human race, as capable as we are 
of pleasure and pain, and invested with as indisputa- 
ble a right as we have to judge of and pursue their own 
happiness.' 

"In fighting them we are warring against the Constitu- 
tion of the United States, the Declaration of Independence, 
the fundamental principles of our own government, and are 
laboring to bring down upon our country the terrible pun- 
ishment which always follows such great national sins. 



30 The Great Trial of the 

"It is possible that if Congress repudiates the war of the 
President, the country may escape its impending doom. But 
if Congress approves it and changes the war from an execu- 
tive and personal one to a national one, our fate is sealed. 
How soon our punishment will come is known only to 
Omniscience. 

"That Mighty Hand which formed and regulates the ma- 
chinery of the moral world seems at times to increase its 
speed and at times to retard it; sometimes to hasten the 
punishment of great national crimes and at others to post- 
pone it. England has not yet been punished for some of her 
outrages upon the nations; but the United States was pun- 
ished within a few years after its commission for the spolia- 
tion of Mexico. All the signs of the times indicate that our 
next chastisement may come soon. It is possible that it 
may be postponed to after-times. 

"It was argued in this case that 'honor and patriotism 
required the President to make and continue this war to the 
extermination of the Filipinos if that were necessary to 
subdue them.' Few words in our language are more abused 
than the words 'honor' and 'patriotism.' False notions of 
honor have led to the murder of thousands of men in duels 
— many of them great and useful men like Hamilton and 
Decatur — false notions of honor have led to the slaughter of 
millions of men in war. 

"A great writer defines honor as: 'The finest sense of 
justice the human mind can frame.' Nothing is honorable 
that is not just, and everything is dishonorable that is un- 
just. By this standard the acts of nations as well as of in- 
dividuals must be measured, and their record must be made. 



Nineteenth Century. 31 

If it is a record of blood shed in an unjust (or an unneces- 
sary war, which is substantially perhaps the same), all the 
waters of the ocean cannot wash it out, and it will be a rec 
ord of dishonor to the end of time. 

"Nor has the word 'patriotism' any proper application 
as here intended. Patriotism in war requires us to fight for 
our own country in a just war. It does not require us to 
fight against any country in an unjust war, for unjust wars 
ruin the country that makes them. 

"One of the ablest writers living has said: 'The 
greater part of the bloody deeds which disgrace history and 
make of it such immoral reading were committed in the 
name of patriotism.' 

"Many of the greatest tyrants, traitors, and hypocrites 
who ever lived had a great deal to say about patriotism. 
They chose the livery of heaven to serve the devil in; 
for true patriotism is a heaven-born virtue. It is founded 
in justice and truth; it draws its inspiration from the God 
of truth and justice, and is ever* faithful to the source from 
which it sprung. True patriotism has been called the no- 
blest of human virtues; but there is no nobility in fight- 
ing for injustice and falsehood or robbery or murder. The 
true patriot labors in war and in peace for those things, 
and those things only, which will redound to the real and 
lasting good of his country. He rejoices in her success in 
every just and useful enterprise; weeps over her errors and 
misfortunes; burns to avenge her injuries; labors for her 
universal prosperity; and dies, if necessary, for her preser- 
vation. It is to such a patriotism in the hearts of our 
fathers, animating them alike in the council and on the bat- 



32 The Great Trial of the 

tie-field, that we are indebted for these inestimable institu- 
tions; and if posterity ever enjoys them, it will be indebted 
to the same spirit so animating and so directing this 
generation, 

''But the words 'patriotism,' 'honor,' and 'glory,' as ap- 
plied to this most lamentable war against the Filipinos, 
are entirely out of place. As so used, they are merely what 
Shakespeare calls 'springes to catch woodcocks.' 

"It was said in the argument that 'the Filipinos are 
barbarians, and that the President's war against them is a 
war for civilization, and, as such, should be sustained 
by Congress and the people.' Exactly the contrary is the 
fact. Wars of conquest, such as this, are the very highest 
expressions of barbarism. The object of the party that car- 
ries on the war to subdue the other and make it submit to 
its authority, is to conquer it by inflicting upon it an 
intolerable amount of wounds, disease, starvation, mis- 
ery, and death. Such a war means murder, robbery, arson, 
drunkenness, gambling, and crimes that strike the soul with 
horror but to name them. General Sheridan said, 'War is 
hell.' Such a war as this is the very pit of that deplorable 
region. 

"To say that civilization can be spread by the barbar- 
ism of such a war is like saying that truth can be spread by 
falsehood, knowledge by ignorance, or light by darkness. 
In such a war the aggressor is the greater barbarian of the 
two, no matter what his superiority may be in other re- 
spects, nor what his professions and pretenses may be. 

"But it is said by the defense that 'no matter what the 
merits of the contest may have been originally, neither the 



Nineteenth Century. 33 

President nor Congress can stop it now. It must go on till 
the Filipinos are subdued. That any other course would 
be a lasting injury to our country and make us the laughing- 
stock of the world.' 

The answer to this is, that some of the greatest nations 
and wisest statesmen and most successful warriors have, 
when the occasion demanded it, done this very thing, and 
always with good results. Alexander the Great com- 
menced the conquest of India and was loth to give it up; 
but his soldiers convinced him that it would be a fool- 
ish thing to persevere in such an undertaking, and he 
reluctantly led them back to Babylon, the capital of his em- 
pire, and was stronger and more popular for it. 

Augustus Caesar fixed the boundaries of the Roman 
Empire at the Danube on the north and the Euphrates on 
the east. One of his successors, the Emperor Julian, under- 
took to spread Roman civilization beyond these rivers by 
war and to enlarge the boundaries of the empire. In this 
attempt he lost a large part of his army and his own life. 
His successor, Hadrian, restored the boundaries of Augus- 
tus and settled all questions with the nations concerned 
peacefully and to the benefit of his country and to his own 
honor. 

"William the Conqueror, in the zenith of his power, 
undertook the conquest of Brittany, a province in France, 
and made some advances in that direction. But he found it 
a very difiicult and doubtful job; and, notwithstanding his 
characteristic determination and stubbornness, he had the 
good sense to give it up and retire to his own country. 

''Edward the Third and Henry the Fifth and his sue- 



34 The Great Trial of the 

cessors attempted to reduce France to a state of vassalage 
to England, and did conquer a large part of it and gain 
some great victories. But the labors of a century were vain. 
A patriotic and enthusiastic girl broke the power of England, 
and the invader was compelled to abandon every foot of land 
acquired in France after a hundred-years war. The English 
historians inform us that this result was a great benefit 
to their country and laid the foundations of her future 
greatness. 

"Great Britain tried, wickedly, to reduce her North 
American colonies to subjection; failed, after a seven-years 
war, and acknowledged their independence. Macaulay in- 
forms us that 'his country was more powerful after she lost 
those colonies than before.' 

"These and other instances which might be adduced 
show that it is mental weakness, not strength, which causes 
rulers to persevere in a wicked or foolish war for fear of 
ridicule. 

"It is too late for Mr. McKinley and his supporters in 
the Philippine business to try to avoid ridicule. They have 
run the whole gamut of absurdity from 'criminal aggres- 
sion' to 'benevolent assimilation.' They have attempted to 
prove that barbarism is civilization, that slavery is freedom, 
that wrong is right, and that black is white. In the mean- 
time they have murdered many thousand men and are vig- 
orously preparing to do much greater slaughtering in the 
same line. 

"These things have made the President and his support- 
ers not only ridiculous, but odious, and it is a ridicule and 
odium whioii will last. 



'Nineteenth Century. 35 

" 'Derision shall strike them forlorn, 
A mockery that never shall die.' 

"It was said in the argument, that 'the time had come 
for the United States to be a world power, and to that end 
this nation should imitate the example of the other great 
Anglo-Saxon nation, and adopt the colonial system, and ex- 
tend her territories and dominion around the globe.' 

"The answer to this is, that the example of England is 
a bad one. She has been the great robber nation of the 
world for 1450 years. The Anglo-Saxons landed on the 
coast of Kent in 449 A. D., and according to the English his- 
torians they were pirates then ; and, in dealing with weaker 
people, whose territory or trade they coveted, they have 
been pirates and robbers and murderers ever since. They 
started in England as the allies of the Britons, but in a 
short time they demanded the country of its possessors and 
owners; and, because the Britons denied their demand, they 
waged a war of extermination against them, with short in- 
tervals, for one hundred and fifty years, and finally con- 
quered them. 

"Then they turned their weapons against one another 
and, off and on, were engaged in civil wars of great atroc- 
ity for nearly two hundred years, until the advent of the 
Danes compelled them to attend to these new robbers, who 
pillaged the country from time to time for about two hun- 
dred years more, till William the Conqueror crushed them 
altogether. 

"The English robbed and murdered the Irish for cen- 
turies. An English historian says: 'They made Ireland the 
abode of wretchedness for five hundred years.' The Irish 



36 The Great Trial of the 

patriot Emmet told the judge who condemned him to an 
infamous death for seeking the freedom of his country, that 
'if all the blood he had unrighteously shed was collected in 
one vast reservoir, his Lordship could swim in it.' The Irish 
soil has been enriched by the blood of thousands, shed by 
the remorseless Englishman. 

"The principality of Wales was harried for centuries 
by the English pirates; and their so-called 'greatest king,' 
Edward the First, put the Welsh prince David to an igno- 
minious death, and had him drawn and quartered for his de- 
votion to the liberties of his country. 

"The Scottish patriot Wallace suffered the same fate 
at the hands of this king. Scotland was for ages the scene 
of British oppression and cruelty, and even William the 
Third caused one of the Scottish clans to be massacred at 
Glencoe, with such circumstances of treachery, perfidy, and 
cruelty as caused the ear of humanity to tingle and left an 
indelible stain on the escutcheon of the English king. 

"England tried for more than one hundred years to con- 
quer France. The bones of myriads of Frenchmen slaugh- 
tered to gratify the ambition of English kings and of the 
English people are mingled with the dust throughout half 
the provinces of the country of Lafayette. 

"India is a fair specimen of the English colonial svs 
tem. The country has been bled for ages to satisfy the in- 
satiate greed of the Anglo-Saxon for territory, trade and 
tribute, and it takes an army of 75,000 soldiers to keep the 
natives of that country from rising against their oppressors 
and in vengeance driving them into the Indian Ocean, Burke 
described the men who managed the affairs of the East In- 



Nineteenth Century. 37 

dia Company as 'men whom no treaty would bind and 
against whom the laws that held the world together were 
no protection.' 

''In 1840 the Chinese authorities determined to stop the 
English traders from selling opium to their people, and, by 
agreement with the English envoy residing in that country, 
twenty thousand casks of opium were destroyed. For this 
England made war upon China, tooli several of her cities, 
and compelled her to pay an indemnity of about $20,000,000. 
This was done by a Christian nation to a pagan nation, be- 
cause the pagans wished to stop the Christians from demor- 
alizing their people by an accursed drug. 

"For years past England has been waiting for a favor- 
able opportunity to dismember China and appropriate all 
she can get of her territory. She is encouraging our war 
against the Filipinos because it gives countenance and 
support to her Asiatic and African colonial policy of con- 
quest, territorial subjugation, expansion, and tribute; and at 
present she is endeavoring to Blot out the South African 
republics and put their territory into her capacious maw. 

"The history of England for a thousand years is largely 
a history of robbery and murder. Considering the great ad- 
vantages she has possessed during the greater part of that 
time, it is a most sickening portion of the history of the 
human race. It is in a great measure the history of an in- 
telligent and progressive barbarism. 

"To the United States, Great Britain has been an un- 
natural step-mother. She tried to reduce us to slavery in 
the Revolution. She employed the Hessians and the Indians 
against her own children. She was against us in our late 



88 The Great Trial of the 

fearful struggle for national existence, and secretly favored 
and assisted the Southern Confederacy. She encourages 
us in our present unhallowed war for selfish purposes, and 
will turn against us whenever her interest demands it. 

"There have been many great and good men in England 
and the world is indebted to them in every department of 
science, literature, and art. Pitt, Burke, and other great ora- 
tors and statesmen opposed the government of their country 
in its oppression of our fathers before the Revolution and in 
the war it made to subdue them, and their names should be 
honored and revered forever. England has produced many 
philanthropists who have been benefactors of mankind. 

"But the greatness of England in dealing with other 
nations, and especially with weaker ones than herself, 
has been an intellectual and not a moral greatness. In this 
respect she has ever been an oppressor and will be so held 
till her foreign policy is changed. Distant, far distant be 
the day when this country shall be misled by the baleful 
light of her example; but that example, and the new and 
strange doctrines by which it was attempted to defend this 
Philippine War, must be repudiated by the American people. 
The war upon the Declaration of Independence, the attempt 
to overthrow or undermine it, must cease. The effort to sup- 
press the freedom of speech and establish a military despot- 
ism in the name of patriotism must be put down. The 
government of this country must return to the princi- 
ples and practice of the men who founded it. It must stop 
its mad career of war and conquest. While claiming, de- 
fending, and preserving the right of the people of the Uni- 
ted States to liberty, independence, and self-government, it 



Nineteenth Century. 39 

must concede the same rights to all other nations and peo- 
ples. Thus only can it secure the confidence of the people, 
the respect of mankind, and the favor of that Almighty 
Power who holds the destinies of men and nations in the 
hollow of His hands. 

"It will be a glorious day for our country when it can be 
said with sincerity and truth that all its rulers and all its 
people are in favor of liberty for all nations, and opposed to 
forcing any form of government upon any people. May God 
speed the coming of that day." 



SPEECH OF GENERAL GRANT. 

General Grant's speech was a surprise to me. I knew 
the General personally and considered him the most quiet, 
reticent public man I had ever known. Great interest was 
felt in what he would say, but it was not expected that he 
would say much. On the contrary, he made what, for him, 
was a long speech. This may have been caused by the 
speech of Mr. Clay, who preceded him, and to whom he re- 
ferred. It is highly probable that he was led to speak so 
freely of the Mexican War by what Mr. Clay said on that 
subject. He says, in his "Memoirs," that he "was a great ad- 
mirer of Mr. Clay." 

He begun by stating that although he had served in two 
wars, the Mexican War and the war to put down the Rebel- 
lion, the military profession was not his choice. When he 
was a student at West Point his highest ambition was to be 
a professor in some college or university. A military life 



40 The Great Trial of the 

had no charms for him, and he had not the faintest idea of 
staying in the Army, even if he should be graduated, which 
he did not expect. His going to West Point was his father's 
arrangement, not his. The first year he was there a bill was 
introduced into Congress to abolish the Military Academy, 
and he was in hopes it would pass, as he saw in this an honor- 
able way to obtain a discharge. But the bill failed, and he 
remained a cadet at that institution. 

It was in this way that he became a soldier in the Mexi- 
can War. He had always considered that this was a politi- 
cal and an unholy war. He was bitterly opposed to the an- 
nexation of Texas, and to this day he regarded the war 
which resulted as one of the most unjust wars ever waged 
by a stronger against a weaker nation. It was an instance 
of a republic following the bad example of European mon- 
archies, in not considering justice in their desire to acquire 
additional territory. 

Even if the annexation itself could be justified, the man- 
ner in which the subsequent war was forced upon Mexico 
cannot. The fact is, annexationists wanted more territory 
than they could possibly lay any claim to as part of the new 
acquisition. 

In taking military possession of Texas after annexation, 
the army of occupation, under General Taylor, was directed 
to occupy the disputed territory. The army did not stop at 
the Nueces, and offer to negotiate for a settlement of the 
boundary question, but went beyond, apparently in order 
to force Mexico to initiate war. He was satisfied that Gen- 
eral Taylor looked upon the Mexicans as the aggrieved party, 
but he was obliged to obey his instructions. This is one of 



Nineteenth Century. 41 

the greatest objections to the military profession — that the 
soldier is obliged to obey his orders, no matter how unjust 
they may be. Practically, the soldier is a machine, having 
no use for either conscience or principle, as against his 
orders, and must run as the machine master directs, even if 
he runs himself and his country to perdition. 

The presence of United States troops on the edge of the 
disputed territory furthest from the Mexican settlements 
was not sufficient to provoke hotilities. We were sent to 
provoke a fight, but it was essential that Mexico should 
commence it. It was very doubtful whether Congress 
would declare war; but if Mexico should attack our troops, 
the Executive could announce, "Whereas, war exists by the 
act of Mexico," etc., and prosecute the contest with vigor. 
Once initiated, there were but few public men who would 
have the courage to oppose it. As a rule, Americau soldiers 
are brave; but American politicians are not. And it often 
happens that a brave soldier, when he is turned into a poli- 
tician, is, by that very act, turned into a coward. The his- 
tory of our country has furnished some striking examples of 
this truth. As to politicians, he had heard of very promi- 
nent ones who were strongly opposed to the Philippine War 
(while the Administration was in suspense whether to make 
it or not), as unjust to the Filipinos and ruinous to our 
own country; but who, after it was brought on by our man- 
agement, denounced as traitors those who continued true to 
their convictions, and still held and expressed their original 
and honest sentiments. Such men sacrifice their country to 
their party, and are unsafe counsellors for a free people. 

This war is a good illustration of the trite saying that 



42 The Great Trial of the 

"history repeats itself." We were exploited into a war witli 
the Filipinos in the same way, substantially, as the Mexi- 
can War was brought about. The management was about 
the same in each case. And the object of the war in each 
case was the same. Primarily, it was in one case to extend 
slavery, and in the other to establish serfdom. But the ul- 
timate object in each case was to make money out of the la- 
bor of other men ; and, to that end, to govern them and their 
country as we pleased. 

He said that he had given his views of slavery and war 
briefly, in another place, but he would avail himself of this 
occasion to give them more fully, for the times, he thought, 
demanded it. 

He concurred entirely with Mr. Clay in the opinion that 
nothing but "dire necessity" would justify a nation in mak- 
ing war. It might seem strange to some that, as he had 
served in two wars, he should be so much opposed to what 
seemed to be his own profession; and he thought, perhaps, 
that the present occasion would justify him in giving some 
of the reasons for his opposition. 

His natural dislike to war was very much developed 
and strengthened by a sermon upon that subject which he 
heard when he was a young man. It was very much 
increased by reading history; and his own experience had 
made it so odious to him that he would do anything that was 
right to avoid it. 

The sermon referred to was a remarkable effort, and 
made such an impression upon him that he still remembered 
a considerable part of it. The text was a verse in Isaiah, 
which he had often heard quoted, and which he had some- 
times read : 



Nineteenth Century. 43 

"4. And He shall judge among the nations, and shall 
rebuke many people: and they shall beat their swords into 
plowshares and their spears into pruning-hooks; nation 
shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall 
they learn war any more." 

In explaining this text the preacher first described war, 
and illustrated it by word-pictures drawn from the siege of 
Jerusalem by Titus, from the retreat of Napoleon from Mos- 
cow, and from the horrible cruelties practiced by the suc- 
cessful party during the civil wars in England. 

"I have never," the General said, "heard anything equal 
to the description this preacher gave of the siege and 
destruction of Jerusalem. Titus was naturally cruel, though 
he afterwards became apparently humane, from policy. The 
history of that siege, as some historian has truly said, is a 
story of 'incredible horrors.' It is too dreadful to be more 
than alluded to here: famine, fire, pestilence, murder, un- 
natural and vile brutality before the city was taken, and the 
giving of it up to slaughter and destruction by an inhuman 
soldiery afterwards. 

"As this man drew this picture with a master hand, I 
could almost see the wretched victims of Roman ferocity, 
and of their own folly, dying of disease and starvation; I 
could almost hear the cries and groans of helpless mothers 
and their starving children, making the city of David and 
Solomon a sardonic mockery of its former pride and glory. 

"With the same powerful memory and imagination, 
this man described the retreat of the great army of Na- 
poleon from Moscow. He painted, almost to the very life, 
the destruction of hundreds of thousands of men on that fa- 



44 The Great Trial of the 

tal retreat. All of them, he said, had a right to life and to 
the blessings of life; they all perished the miserable victims 
of the towering ambition of a man of transcendent genius, 
but whose heart was as hard as the nether millstone. 

''In like manner he depicted the cruelties inflicted by 
the successful party in the many civil wars of England, oc- 
curring from time to time during the long period of nearly 
a thousand years. He said and proved, from English his- 
tories, that for hundreds of j^ears the tender mercies of our 
English ancestors to their enemies of their own race 
and country was cruelty. As he described these enormities 
I seemed to "hear the cries of vengence and the shrieks of 
torture." And I wondered then, and wonder now, how 
such things could be done, so continuously, in a professedly 
civilized and Christian nation. To me it is incoinpreheusible. 

"Before closing his sermon, the preacher stated that 
there were two forces in our country which, properly di- 
rected and exercised, could, in a few years, render an un- 
just or unnecessary war on the part of the United States im- 
possible. Those forces were the influence of women and the 
influence of the clergy. And it was peculiarly their province 
and duty and interest to use every effort to put an end to this 
greatest scourge of mankind. 

"Throughout the entire history of our race women had 
been subject to outrage from the demon of war. They had 
been, and still are, liable to lose their husbands, fathers, 
brothers, sons, and near and dear friends, killed in battle or 
by disease; to have their homes ruined, their property de- 
stroyed; to be reduced to poverty, want, and misery. It is 
their duty to teach their children the true nature and char- 



Nineteenth Century. 45 

acter of war, and never to have anything to do with it unless 
forced by stern necessity. It is their duty to use all their 
influence, everywhere, against it, and to teach that military 
glory is a delusion and a snare. 

"As to the clergy, there is nothing in which they are so 
derelict as in this. It is as much their duty to preach 
against war as against robbery and murder, for war is rob- 
bery and murder combined. 

"There is no necessity for the United States having any 
more wars. It can get all that it is entitled to without. We 
had a war with Mexico lately, not because it was necessary, 
but because we wanted and sought war and did not want 
and seek peace. It is a very unfortunate thing to be 
obliged to take the life of a man in a just cause; but to shed 
the blood of thousands in an unjust war is u fearful crime. 
And yet, a majority of the preachers of this country, either 
tacitly or openly, encourage such crimes. Some do their 
duty and preach openly and boldly against it, but their 
name is not legion. 

"The preacher said, in conclusion, that he did not see 
how any rational being could be a true Christian and believe 
in war. To say that such a thing is possible seemed to him 
like saying that the same body could fill two entirely differ- 
ent spaces at the same time. 

"We hear and read of the way of life and the way of 
death, and the road to ruin and the road to Heaven. The 
broadest and most comprehensive road to ruin, individual 
and national, is war. There ought to be hung on high an 
enormous guide-board, with the inscription in characters of 



46 The Great Trial of the 

living light: 'War — this is the way to Hell, going down to 

the chambers of Death.' 

''Running in the opposite direction is the road to 

Heaven. It is not so broad, but it is lighted by the presence 

of the Prince of Peace and cheered by the voice of the God of 

love; a voice sweeter to the ear than all the songs of the 

sirens of war. 

" 'It speaks of peace, it speaks of love, 
It speaks as angels speak above; 
For, oh, it is a father's voice, 
That bids a trembling world rejoice.' " 

Continuing, General Grant said that he had endeav- 
ored to reproduce, from memory and notes taken at the time, 
some points of the discourse which had contributed so much 
to the formation of his opinion of the folly and wickedness 
of war; but the discourse was a lengthy one, and he must 
omit the greater part of it. His subsequent study of his- 
tory and his experience in two wars confirmed the opinions 
then formed. 

He was not much of a theologian himself, but if, as the 
preacher had quoted, all the nations that forget God are to 
be cast into hell, the nation that makes unrighteous wars 
will surely not escape. In the light of history as well as of 
revelation, such wars put the guilty nation that makes them 
on the direct road to moral, financial, and political destruc- 
tion. On the other hand, "the way of peace" is the true 
road to the heaven of nations. 

The preacher was right in his estimation of the enor- 
mous responsibility of the clergy and the women of our 
country in this matter of war. If they had done their duty 



Nineteenth Century ^ 47 

since the Rebellion, there would have been no Philippine 
War. If they will do it in the future, we will have no more 
such wars to oft'end the Deity and to disgrace our country. 

In closing his speech, the General said that he went in- 
to the War of the Rebellion voluntarily, but that was a nec- 
essary war for the salvation of our country. But it was a 
fearful lesson, and should teach us the necessity of avoiding 
wars in the future. It grew out of the Mexican War and 
was the penalty we paid for the wrongs which preceded, 
accompanied, and followed that war. The Philippine War, 
though worse than the Mexican, had, as already stated, a 
similar origin. If it is continued to the end and the objects 
of its authors are attained, we cannot hope to escape a simi- 
lar punishment. 

Since the sermon which he had cited was preached, our 
country, in conquering the Rebellion, has exhibited to all 
the nations such vast resources and such overwhelming 
power that none of them, unless governed by madmen, will 
ever give us just cause for war. If without such cause we 
make war against any of them, as in the present case, it is 
murder, and the blood we shed, like the blood of Abel, will 
cry to heaven against us. 



SPEECH OF MR. JEFFERSON. 

"I have never been in the habit of public speak- 
ing," said Mr. Jefferson, "and only arise now to correct two 
mistakes into which some of the advocates of the President 

have fallen. 

4 



48 The Great Trial of the 

"They have represented that the Declaration of Inde- 
pendence was made only for a special occasion; that it had 
no general application; was obsolete, and could not prop- 
erly be quoted against the war the President had made, and 
was carrying on, to force the Filipinos to submit to the 
military power of the United States. This was a mistake. 
That Declaration, it is true, had its origin in the contest be- 
tween Great Britain and her thirteen North American colo- 
nies in 1770; but it was intended to declare, and did declare, 
the right of all mankind, of every age and of every nation 
and of every color, to life, liberty, and the pursuit of hap- 
piness; that the object of governments was to secure 
these rights, and that the 'consent of the governed' was 
a condition precedent to the rightful authority of any 
government. 

"According to the Declaration, as it was intended and 
always understood by the men who made it and by the peo- 
ple for whom it was made, the humblest, poorest, and most 
obscure man in any nation is as much entitled to the rights 
enumerated in it as any king, emperor, or president. These 
rights can only be forfeited by crime. There is not, as has 
been contended, any 'principle of international law' under 
which the Filipinos can be deprived of their rights. The 
teachings of that law and of the Declaration are substan- 
tially the same upon the rights of 'all men.' Both require 
'the consent of the governed' to the 'just powers' of govern- 
ments. And if they did not, the Declaration would still be 
the supreme law to the government and people of the Uni- 
ted States, and binding upon them in their dealings with 
other governments and peoples. 



Nineteenth Century. 49 

"The other mistake I wish to notice is, that 'the exam- 
ple of the Louisiana purchase is a justification of the pur^ 
chase of the Filipinos and their subsequent treatment by 
the President and Congress,' There is no analogy between 
the cases. If the Louisiana Territory at the time of its pur- 
chase had contained eight or ten million inhabitants; if they 
had been fighting many years for freedom, independence, 
and self-government, and part of that time as allies of the 
ITnited States; if, at the time of the purchase, they had 
nearly achieved their independence; if they never consented 
to the purchase, refused to acquiesce in it, and declared 
their determination to be free and independent and to gov 
ern themselves, there would be considerable similarity be- 
tween the cases. But none of these conditions were pres- 
ent in that case, and it fails entirely as a precedent for the 
other. It is a clear case of abandonment, in the face of the 
nations of the world, of the principles upon which our gov- 
ernment was founded, and of an unrighteous claim sup- 
ported by a murderous war. 

"Not a man who signed the Declaration or the Consti- 
tution would have tolerated such a claim as that. The gov- 
ernment and the people would have scouted it as a disgrace 
and shame. I tremble for my country when I remem- 
ber that God is just and that my countrymen are struggling 
to take by a bloody war from millions of people those 
inalienable rights with which He has endowed all His 
children. 

"Congress should promptly concede the independ- 
ence of the Filipinos, and the longer that act of justice is 
delayed the worse it will be for our country. In a paroxysm 



60 The Great Trial of the 

of rapacity worthy of the Anglo-Saxon, we have done a 
great wrong, been guilt}' of great oppression, and forfeited 
the confidence of mankind. We can only regain that confi- 
dence by a return to the paths of justice and freedom. 

"Our army should be recalled and at least three-fourths 
of it disbanded. We need no large standing armies for any 
purpose. Such armies eat out the substance of the people, 
and are often used to enslave them. 

"As to the trial which has led to this meeting and 
caused this discussion, I wish to say that, in common with 
all the members of the jury, I very much regretted to be 
obliged to find a verdict of guilty, but that, under the evi- 
dence and the instructions of the Court, no other ver- 
dict was possible." 



ABRAHAM LINCOLN'S SPEECH. 

Mr. Lincoln said: "Although nearly every allegation 
of fact in this case has been contested, there are some 
things about which there is no dispute, and those are, 
that twenty thousand Filipinos and two thousand Ameri- 
cans came to their deaths in the Philippine Islands since 
the close of the war with Spain, and that the war against 
them was begun and is being carried on by the defendant 
as Commander-in-chief of the Army and Navy of the Uni- 
ted States. Nor has there been, nor can there be, much con- 
test over the proposition that, if the war so inaugurated and 
waged by the President was and is unjust, he is guiltj 
as charged in the indictment. 



Nineteenth Century- SI 

"The great contention and principal defense has been, 
and still is, that the war is just and that it was the right and 
duty of the Tiesident to wage it till those people submitted 
to the authority of the United States and accepted what- 
ever government the President set up over them tem- 
porarily, and afterwards the permanent government estab- 
lished by Congress. That by the treaty of peace with 
Spain, the United States acquired the sovereignty of the en- 
tire Philippine Archipelago, and that it was the duty of all 
the inhabitants of those islands to submit to its authority; 
that, on the contrary, they resisted it, claimed that they 
were, and of right ought to be, free and independent, and 
that they became rebels whom it was necessary to subdue, 
and that the deaths that followed were justifiable and right. 

''This contention by implication denies the self-evident 
truths of the Declaration of Independence, '^hat all men are 
created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with 
certain inalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty 
and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights 
governments are instituted among men, deriving their just 
powers from the consent of the governed; that when- 
ever any form of government becomes destructive of these 
ends it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it and to 
institute a new government, laying its foundation on such 
principles and organizing its powers in such form as to them 
shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness; 
that when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing 
invariably the same object, evinces a design to reduce them 
under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to 



52 The Great Trial of the 

throw off such government and to provide new guards for 
their future security.' 

''Spain, by a long train of abuses, had forfeited any 
right she may have had to hold, possess, and govern the 
Philippine Islands, or any part of them, and those peo- 
ple had rightfully thrown off her government and set up one 
of their own before the ratification of her treaty with 
the United States. According to the Declaration, this 
ended all the rights Spain ever had in the Philippine Archi- 
pelago, and in that respect she conveyed nothing and 
the United States acquired nothing by the treaty. So far 
as the Filipinos were concerned, it M'as absolutely null 
and void. 

"I think that this is the natural and inevitable con- 
clusion which follows the admission of the truths of the 
Declaration. 

"The real question in this case is whether we shall sus- 
tain the Declaration or trample it under foot. In my opin- 
ion, the salvation of the country depends upon sustaining it. 
To abandon it is to abandon the only hope for the preserva- 
tion of our free institutions. Whenever we deny the right 
of any people to freedom and independence and self-govern- 
ment, and force upon them a government against their con- 
sent, we forfeit the right to those blessings ourselves. 
Sooner or later that forfeiture will be enforced against us, 
as sure as there is a just God who rules in the armies 
of Heaven and among the habitations of men. 

"Our fathers labored and fought and suffered through 
a seven-years war to make good that Declaration. They 
endured hunger, cold, sickness, wounds, and death; they 



Nineteenth Century. 53 

marched in the winter over the frozen ground to find 
the enemy, and their bloody foot-prints upon the snow told 
of their naked feet. That Declaration was baptised in the 
blood of the Revolution and dedicated forever to the free- 
dom, not of any one people, but of the human race. Its 
authors meant to set up a standard maxim for free soci- 
ety which should be familiar to all and revered by all, con- 
stantly looked to, constantly labored for, and, even though 
never perfectly attained, constantly approximated, and 
thereby constantly spreading and diffusing its influence, 
and augmenting the happiness and value of life to all peo- 
ple of all colors everywhere. 

"The assertion that 'all men are created equal' was of 
no practical use in effecting our separation from Great Brit- 
ain, and it was placed in the Declaration not for that, but 
for future use. Its authors meant it to be as, thank God! it 
is now proving itself, a stumbling-block to all those who, in 
after-times, might seek to turn a free people back into the 
hateful paths of despotism. They knew the proneness of 
prosperity to breed tyrants, and they meant that when such 
should reappear in this fair land and commence their voca- 
tion they should find left for them at least one hard nut to 
crack. 

"It has been said in the argument of this case that by 
the war to put down the Rebellion we forced upon the 
Southern States a government to which they did not con- 
sent. To this I answer that they had consented to it long 
before, had lived under it many years, had participated in 
it, had enjoyed its protection and benefits, and had fur- 
nished many of its presidents. 

/ 



54 The Great Trial of the 

"Several of those assisted in making the Declaration of 
Independence, in forming the Constitution, and in setting 
the government in motion. Jefferson was the author of the 
Declaration and Madison has been called the 'father of the 
Constitution,' 

''Many of the rebellious States had been consenting to 
and participating in the government of the United States for 
nearly half a century. They seceded because they wished 
to repudiate their own work and to found a new em- 
pire whose chief corner-stone should be slavery — exactly the 
opposite principle to that of the Declaration. 

"No analogy can be found between this case and that of 
the Filipinos. It is not easy to understand how reason- 
able men can seriously attempt such an argument as that. 
With all the facts against them, their logic seems to indi- 
cate some kind of hallucination by which things seem ex- 
actly the opposite of what they really are. Such reasoners 
seem to me to be turned upside down, and to be standing on 
their heads with their heels dangling in the air. 

"But it is attempted to plow round the Declaration of In- 
dependence by saying that the very object of conquering the 
Filipinos is to give them the blessings of free government. 
It is astonishing that men should deceive themselves or un- 
dertake to deceive others by such a fallacy as that. Free- 
dom and force are opposites. The very fact that any govern- 
ment is forced upon a people makes it, as to them, a despot- 
ism. In the very nature of things, no government can 
be free to which the people to be governed do not freely and 
voluntarily consent. This attempt to get rid of the Declara- 



Nineteenth Century. 55 

tion is absurd on its face, and tlie defense that the 'killing 
was done in a state of war' is no defense at all. 

'This Philippine War is in some respects like the Mexi- 
can War. Both were unjustly and unconstitutionally made 
by the President, and both, at first, seemed to be popu- 
lar. In the Mexican War the attempt was made to render 
those who were opposed to the action of the President un- 
popular and odious by ridicule and denunciation, and 
by calling them traitors, etc., etc. 

"The bitterness of the advocates of that war was ex- 
treme. Governor Reynolds, who was a member of the Illi- 
nois Legislature during the war, said in the House of Repre- 
sentatives that he 'almost had the hydrophobia upon that 
subject,' and there were many other members nearly as 
rabid as he. They were, like Saul with the Christians, 'ex- 
ceedingly mad' against the opponents of the war, and they 
did not confine their abuse to politicians. The Rev. Albert 
Hale, pastor of the Second Presbyterian Church of Spring- 
field, Illinois, as chaplain of the House of Representatives, 
appealed to the Almighty against the war and in favor of 
peace. For this he was severely criticised by some of the 
fire-eating members; but Judge Stephen T. Logan, who at 
that time stood at the head of the bar of that State, defend- 
ed Mr. Hale and held that it was not only the right, but the 
duty of the chaplain, as a professed follower of the Prince of 
Peace, to use the influence of his profession and position in 
favor of peace. The rabid war-hounds were not satisfied by 
his argument, but they were kept at bay and Mr. Hale was 
sustained. 

"But the pulpit of the United States was far more out- 



56 The Great Trial of the 

spoken against war at that time than at present. This is the 
worst sign of the times. The influence of Christianity seems 
to be on the wane. Originally one of its principal objects 
was to put an end to war, but now a very large proportion 
of its professors and preachers are in favor of war, and, for 
reasons, directly opposed to the teachings of Christ. 

"As a member of Congress from the Springfield district 
in Illinois, I felt it my duty to make a speech against 
the actions of President Polk in bringing on that war. For 
this I was denounced and ridiculed and made so un- 
popular — while the glamour of our victories over the Mexi- 
cans blinded the people — that my own county of Sangamon 
was opposed to my renomination. There were but two dele- 
gates in the congressional convention — Briggs of Tazewell, 
and Parks of Logan — who were in my favor. All the dele- 
gates from Sangamon (including my law partner, Billy 
Herndon) were against me, and my name was not brought 
before the convention. 

"Mr. Clay also, for the great speech he made against the 
w^ar at Lexington in 1847, was at first abused and de- 
nounced. It w^as not long, however, till the sky cleared so 
that the people could see and understand his arguments and 
appreciate his patriotism, and the next year he was elected 
United States senator by an almost unanimous vote of the 
Legislature of Kentucky. It is hardly necessary for me to 
refer to my own history after the false, glaring light of the 
Mexican War had passed away. I will only say that few 
men have been more bitterly denounced, and perhaps no 
man was ever more triumphantly vindicated. 

"The judgments of the Lord are true and righteous alto- 



Nineteenth Century. 57 

gether. Our country was terribly punished by the Civil War, 
not only for sustaining slavery so long, but also for the 
Mexican War, which was made and waged principally for 
the purpose of extending and perpetuating it. There is 
reason to fear a still greater punishment if we continue this 
Philippine War till we conquer and enslave that unhappy 
people. 

"But it is said that to abandon the attempt to conquer 
them now would make our country ridiculous. This reminds 
me of a story I once heard or read. In the time of that great 
Anglo-Norman king, Henry the Second, it was the fashion 
in London for the sons of considerable citizens to form them- 
selves into bands and to break into rich houses and plunder 
them and rob and murder the inmates. A band of these 
worthies once broke into a rich house which they expected 
to make an easy prey. On the contrary, they met with such 
fierce resistance that they stopped to consult whether to ad- 
vance or recede. The captain took the ground that if they 
retired, all London would laugh at them. So they proceeded 
with their raid till one-half of them were killed and the rest 
driven into the street, wounded, crippled, and conquered, to 
the great joy of all peaceable and law-abiding citizens. 

'The moral of this story is that ridicule is a poor argu- 
ment, and those who are governed by it are apt to do wicked 
and foolish things. 

"It has been clearly intimated by the President and 
plainly said by some of his supporters that those who are op- 
posed to his Philippine War are disloyal. Those who are in 
favor of it are constantly called patriots — those who are op- 
posed are frequently called traitors. But those words have 



68 The Great Trial of the 

no just and proper application as here intended. True pat- 
riotism requires a man to do all he can for his country in a 
just and unnecessary war, as the American Revolution, the 
War of 1812, and the war to preserve the Union in 
1861-1865. But patriotism does not require a man to sup- 
port such wars as the Mexican and the Philippine. Those 
wars were unjust in themselves and were unconstitutionally 
made by Presidents Polk andMcKinley. Those wars were 
disgraceful and injurious to the country, and calculated to 
bring upon the nation the punishment which, in the order 
of Providence, always follows great national crimes. Patri- 
otism requires all good citizens to oppose all wars which, 
in their ultimate effects and consequences, will injure 
their country. If there is any treason in the matter, it is 
in those who make and encourage such wars, and thus 
call down upon their country the wrath and curse of God. 

''But it is said, as a reason for the conquest of the 
Philippine Islands, that we need them in our business; that 
they would be a benefit to our cotton-growers and various 
other interests, and that their trade and wealth would fur- 
nish occupation and support to many of our speculat- 
ors, traders, and people generally. 

"That was the argument used by the robber to Alexan- 
der the Great. He was brought before the mighty con- 
queror for ese;ntion, on account of a great haul he and his 
band had made from some wealthy Persians who were 
traveling to Babylon. Alexander, when not drunk or in a 
passion, had considerable sense of justice, and consented to 
hear the man before ordering him to execution. The rob- 
ber told the king that he and his band had families to sup- 



Nineteenth Century. 59 

port and that they must live, and could make more by rob- 
bery than any other profession or pursuit. That he, Alex- 
ander, was in the same business — the only difference being 
that he confined himself strictly to the retail trade, while 
the king carried on the largest and most extensive system 
of wholesale robbery that had ever existed. That, while it 
was true that Alexander devoted much of the proceeds of 
his conquests to the building of cities and other improve- 
ments, it was also true that he and his band gave all they 
made, except a comfortable living, to the poor. 

'This speech satisfied the king that he was in the same 
business with the robber, and he ordered his attendants to 
take off his chains and treat him well. 

"Alexander was right All robbers and all conquerors 
who carry on war for territory or trade or tribute are mor- 
ally equal. Their trade is the same their character is the 
same, and their treatment, whether of reward or pun- 
ishment, should be the same. 

"I have been surprised to see many of those who admit 
that this war was originally 'a blunder and an outrage' as- 
sume that, by the ratification of the treaty with Spain, the 
Philippine Archipelago became annexed to the United 
States; that we thus acquired sovereignty over them; and 
that, by insisting upon their right to freedom and independ- 
ence and refusing to submit to our government, the inhabit- 
ants of those islands became rebels. 

"At the time the Congress of the United States declared 
war against Spain it declared also that the Cubans were, 
and of right ought to be, free and independent. The inhabit- 
ants of the island of Cuba and the inhabitants of the Philip- 



60 TJie Great Trial of the 

piue Islands at the time this declaration was made had been 
fighting Spain for years to obtain freedom and independ- 
ence. The Filipinos were far more numerous than the 
Cubans; had more nearly acquired their independence, and, 
according to Admiral Dewey, were more 'capable of self- 
government.' Certainly they had as good a right to free- 
dom and independence as the Cubans. How could a treaty 
between the United States and Spain, to which they were 
not parties and to which they did not consent, abrogate that 
right? The declaration of Congress, the Declaration of In- 
dependence, and the law of nations are all against such an 
assumption, and it seems to me downright impudence 
to make it. The treaty conveyed no more title to the Philip- 
pine Islands than a worthless quit-claim deed. 

"With the failure of this assumption, its corollary, that 
'the war must go on till the rebellion, as it is called, is put 
down,' also falls to the gronnd. To continue the war only 
aggravates the 'blunder' and 'outrage' of beginning it. No 
strength is given to the fallacy I am exposing by calling the 
Filipinos rebels. People cannot rebel where they do not 
owe allegiance, and by no law, human or divine, did these 
people ever owe allegiance to the United States. 

"But it is said as a reason for continuing this war, that 
'the American flag must never be hauled down after it has 
once been set up in any country.' This is mere clap-trap. 
The flag should be kept wherever it properly belongs, and 
nowhere else. If, by accident or mistake or wrong, it is 
planted where it has no right to be, it should be removed. 
The United States never having acquired any rightful 
sovereignty over the Philippine Islands, its flag as an em- 



Nineteenth Century. 61 

blem of sovereignty never had any business there, and Con- 
gress should order its removal. This, so far from being de- 
rogatory to the United States, would have a tendency to re- 
store the confidence of the world in our justice and in our 
fidelity to the rights of men. 

"The flag of our country has been desecrated in this war 
by being used to crush a people wliO were contending for 
freedom, independence, and self-government, and the soon- 
er that desecration ceases, the better it will be for all 
concerned. 

"It is further objected against granting independence 
and self-government to the Filipinos, that if we do this, 
Russia, Germany, or Great Britain will gobble them up. 
This objection is purely imaginary. Those nations have 
their hands full elsewhere and are not likely to interfere in 
this quarter. They have neither the soldiers nor the money 
to spare for that speculation. If they should manifest 
symptoms of that kind, a plain and positive hint from the 
United States would soon settle any of them. But, howevei' 
that may be, this objection is, at best, no better than that of 
the thief who says, 'If I don't take that man's watch, some 
other thief will, and so I will take it just to save it.' It is 
remarkable how all thieves and robbers, whether individual 
or national, use the same arguments to reason money 
or property out of other people's pockets into their own. 

"The claim of the United States to conquer, hold, and 
govern the Philippine Islands rests upon the theory that we 
are vastly superior to the people of those islands, and there- 
fore have a right to subdue them and to provide such gov- 
ernment for them as we think is suitable. I am very sorry 



62 The Great Trial of the 

that there is so little foundation for this theory. Experi 
ence has proved that we do not manage very well the people 
within our own proper limits. We have taken very poor 
care of the Indians and negroes in several of the States of 
this Union. Since we began the war against Spain 'in the 
interest of humanity,' the Indians have been robbed in 
several of the States — in Minnesota alone, according to high 
authority, of at least |300,000 in a few years. It is notorious 
that in some of the States negroes have been tortured, then 
murdered, and their bodies mutilated after death. In some 
of the States we have had bloody riots, and upon such an 
extensive scale as to threaten anarchy and widespread 
civil war. 

"Since our occupation of Manila we have very greatly 
increased the number of its saloons and given 'the heathen 
Chinee' largely increased opportunities to exercise his pe- 
culiar 'ways that are dark and tricks that are vain' upon 
our soldiers and others. In other respects, perhaps, we have 
been equally 'short on morality' since our advent among the 
Filipinos. 

"It is no pleasure for me to refer to our shortcomings 
either at home or abroad. But it is necessary in order to 
show how baseless are our claims in this war and to set the 
truth clearly before the people. If we ever had a 'mission,' 
as some claim, to civilize barbarians and extend the bless- 
ings of liberty throughout the world, we threw away our cre- 
dentials when we made war upon Mexico. Our condition at 
home and abroad shows that we have no right to any such 
'mission.' We must take the beams out of our own eyes be- 



Nineteenth Century. 63 

fore we can see how to take the motes out of the eyes of 
other nations and peoples. 

"I have said that at present it seemed to me that Chris- 
tianity was a failure. The Good Book tells us of a time 
when 'evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, de- 
ceiving and being deceived.' That time appears to be upon 
us now. The government of the United States has fallen 
into the hands of evil men and seducers, who deceive the 
people and are themselves deceived. They are the agents, 
tools, and puppets of a vast money power which made 
and controls them. There is a passage in the Apostle 
James which is full of meaning and is peculiarly applicable 
to the rich men who have been so long exploiting the gov- 
ernment and people of the United States. It should be pon- 
dered well by them and by every man who loves his country. 

" '1. Go to now, ye rich men, weep and howl for your 
miseries that shall come upon you. 

" '2. Your riches are corrupted, and your garments 
are moth-eaten. 

" '3. Your gold and silver is cankered; and the rust of 
them shall be a witness against you, and shall eat your flesh 
as it were fire. Ye have heaped treasure together for the 
last days. 

" '4. Behold the hire of the laborers who have reaped 
down your fields, which is of you kept back by fraud, crieth : 
and the cries of them which have reaped are entered into 
the ears of the Lord of Sabaoth. 

" '5. Ye have lived in pleasure on the earth, and been 
wanton; ye have nourished your hearts, as in a day of 
slaughter. 



64 The Great Trial of the 

" 'Q. Ye have condemned and killed the just; and he 
doth not resist you.' 

"No words of mine can add anything to the force of the 
lesson here given us by the Apostle. It is for rich and poor, 
oppressor and oppressed, government and people. If the 
rich men, speculators and politicians, who made or caused 
to be made this Philippine War, would heed it, it might be 
for the lengthening of their tranquillity. 

"There is one view of this Philippine business which to 
me is very humiliating, and that is the attitude in which it 
places our country towards the subject of slavery. 

"The civilized world made the slave trade felony seventy 
years ago. The United States abolished negro slavery 
thirty-five years ago. Now, the present administration says 
it has purchased the Philippine Islands and owns them and 
has the right to govern them as it chooses; that the inhab- 
itants of those islands have no right to govern themselves, 
but must submit, unconditionally, to the authority of their 
purchasers. That is to say, the United States has revived 
the slave trade and purchased ten million slaves. It is 
no answer to say that the transaction between Spain and 
the United States merely made the Filipinos serfs, for 
serfdom is slavery. It differs in some respects from personal 
vassalage, but it is slavery none the less. 

"This condition was forced upon those people by 
the United States after they had acted as allies at our re- 
quest; had rendered valuable service to our forces in the 
taking of Manila, and after General Otis, the officer in com- 
mand of the United States forces in Luzon, had issued a 
proclamation, in which he said: 'I will assure the people of 



Nineteenth Century. 65 

the Philippine Islands the full measure of individual rights 
and liberties which is the heritage of a free people.' 

"General Otis did this, knowing that his statement was 
false, and having at the time in his possession a proclama- 
tion of the President claiming 'sovereignty' over the Islands 
and directing their 'immediate occupation.' This was done 
to deceive the Filipinos. The Administration sanctioned 
this act of General Otis by retaining him in command, and 
thus became a party to the fraud. I know of no greater act 
of dishonor and perfidy in history than this. It is 
worse than that practiced by Hengist and Horsa upon the 
ancient Britons and deserves universal execration." 

Mr. Lincoln rarely indulged in invective or denun- 
ciation. I was familiar with his speaking, both at the bar 
and the forum, for nearly twenty years. Twice only in that 
time did I hear him abandon his usual method of fair but 
earnest argument and illustration. But now, as the fraud 
of Otis and the revival of the slave trade and the establish- 
ment of a slave empire in the Pacific by the United States 
met in his mind, he seemed to lose his wonderful patience 
and self-control and broke out in a denunciation of the 
authors of these wrongs that almost lifted his hearers from 
their seats. His defense and eulogy of the Declaration of 
Independence was magnificent, far surpassing anything he 
had ever said before. And his invective against those who 
at the same time made war upon that Declaration and upon 
the Filipinos and the fair fame of their country among the 
nations of the earth was terrible in its directness, bitter- 
ness, and force. He declared : 

"Those men are traitors to liberty, are leading their 



66 The Great Trial of the 

countrymen into the hateful paths of despotism, and are un- 
fit to be the rulers of a free people. No man is fit to be a 
ruler of a free people who does not believe in and advocate 
freedom and self-government for all nations and peoples in 
the world. These men are the agents and promoters of 
slavery and despotism, and the enemies, not only of 
their own country, but of the human race. 

"It is in vain for them to endeavor to cover up their ini- 
quities by professing a wish to extend freedom and civiliza- 
tion and religion to the Philippine Islands. Their freedom 
is slavery; their civilization is barbarism; their religion is 
hypocrisy. That hypocrisy is admitted by one of their own 
ablest writers in an article from which I take the following: 
" 'All this gabble about civilization and uplifting the be- 
nighted barbarians of Cuba and Luzon is mere sound and 
fury, signifying nothing. Foolishly or wisely, we want 
these newly acquired territories, not for any missionary or 
altruistic purposes, but for the trade, the commerce, the 
power, and the money there is in them. Why beat about the 
bush and promise all sorts of things? Why not be honest?' 
"The Philippine War has led to a greater development 
of religious and political hypocrisy than was ever before ex- 
hibited in this country. 

"These men endeavor to cover up their iniquities, their 
treason to liberty and their promotion of slavery, by claim- 
ing that the Spanish and Philippine wars added greatly 
to the prestige of the United States and made it one of 
the greatest powers in the world. But the United States 
had been one of the leading powers of the world long before. 
It was the war to put down the Rebellion and preserve the 



Nineteenth Century. 67 

Union that gave our country its commanding position as one 
of the leading and most influential nations in the world. 
That was a war of great armies and great generals on both 
sides, of great battles and great victories and great defeats, 
compared with which the Spanish and Philippine wars were 
child's play — a mere puppet-show. 

"This everlasting boasting on account of our victories 
over the Spaniards and Filipinos is a small business for a 
great nation. It reminds me of a gigantic policeman I once 
knew in Springfield, Illinois. He picked a quarrel with a 
small newsboy about something that was none of his busi- 
ness, and whipped the little fellow half to death. To justify 
himself, he swore every day in the week that his honor re- 
quired that he should whip the boy. And all the rest of his 
life he boasted of what a wonderful victory he had achieved. 

'*If we are ever so unfortunate as to be forced into war 
with one of the 'Great Powers' and are so fortunate as to be 
victorious in that war, we will have something to boast of. 
At present we had better keep quiet. 

"The Philippine War has lessened the patriotism and in- 
creased the selfishness of the American people. It has re- 
duced the courage and increased the immorality of Ameri- 
can politicians. It has caused the nation to take a long 
step on the downward road to national corruption, degener- 
acy, and ultimate ruin. 

"Nothing can save us from the fate that always follows 
wars of aggression and conquest and the consequent 
national demoralization and decay, but reformation at home 
and doing justice abroad to every nation and to every 
people. 



68 The Great Trial of the 

'*It is no pleasure to me to say these things. But faith- 
ful are the wounds of a friend; and he is the best friend of 
his country, who, standing as a sentinel upon the watch- 
tower of liberty, warns his countrymen of the approach of 
danger and shows them the way of escape." 

Mr. Lincoln spoke an hour and a half, his usual time in 
discussing great questions, though occasionally he far ex- 
ceeded that time. He became more and more earnest, and, 
if possible, engrossed and absorbed the attention of his audi- 
ence more and more the longer he spoke. I never before so 
fully realized the statement of Webster, that "when public 
bodies are to be addressed on momentous occasions, true 
ekxiuence is in the man and in the occasion, and clearness 
and force are the qualities that produce conviction." In 
defending the Declaration of Independence from the politi- 
cians, speculators, boodlers, and cranks who are fighting it, 
and in returning their blows, he reminded me of the hurri- 
cane, which in its resistless force bears down everything be- 
fore it. 

He described with great clearness and force how the 
Creator had endowed — i. e., permanently invested — the Fil- 
ipinos, in common with all men, with the inalienable right 
to life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness, and self-government. 

He then drew a picture of an army of Liliputians, the 
right wing of which was led by President McKinley (pushed 
on by Mark Hanna) and the left by President Schurman. 
One wing was trying to take the Declaration by direct as- 
sault and the other to undermine it. He called this a "ridic- 
ulous attempt by a band of pigmies to defeat a magnificent 
endowment of the Almighty." ; ; J 



Nineteenth Century. 69 

He then pictured a glorious being in the distance gaz- 
ing from his home in the clouds upon the scene and smiling 
upon their puny efforts. Then raising himself to his full 
height, he pointed to the skies and cried out in a voice of ex- 
ultation, "He that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh: the 
Lord shall have them in derision." 

While he was yet speaking, the enormous rock which 
represented the Declaration, and which seemed to be embed- 
ded in the foundations of the earth, was moved by some in- 
visible force. In a moment it overwhelmed its miserable as- 
sailants and buried them forever from human sight. 

The effect of this amazing panorama so suddenly cre- 
ated by the magic wand of the Great Vindicator of the Dec- 
laration was so great as to require an immediate adjourn- 
ment of the meeting. On motion of Mr. Madison, all fur- 
ther discussion was postponed till the next day at 10 o'clock 
a. m. 



LAFAYETTE'S SPEECH. 

Lafayette said that he had been a soldier from his 
youth. In his boyhood he had been taught that France was 
the chosen home of chivalry and that the road to honor and 
glory was war. So he joined the Guards; and, at the age of 
nineteen became a captain of dragoons and was proud of 
his skill in all military exercises. 

Fortunately, the first war he became engaged in was 
the American Revolution, a war for liberty and self-govern- 



70 The Great Trial of tJie 

ment, and he never had the least inclination to favor an un- 
just war afterwards. The part he took in the Eevolutiou 
and subsequent wars in his own country was always in fa- 
vor of liberty, justice, and good government. He had, in his 
experience in the old and new worlds, throughout a long 
life, learned a great deal about war. He had been in many 
battles and was once a prisoner for five years in unwhole- 
some dungeons. 

The false teachings of his youth had yielded to the true 
lessons of experience. The bright visions of military glory 
in which he had indulged in early life had been dispelled 
by the stern reality of the battle-field, the siege, and the 
prison, with their accompaniments of wounds, mutilation, 
disease, starvation, misery, and death to all ages, both sexes, 
and the innocent and guilty alike. Upon this subject he had 
learned to think and speak the truth. ''The horrors of war" 
was a true and correct expression ; and there was little room 
for charity for any ruler or any government, of any name or 
nature, which made, or caused to be made, an,y war which 
was not absolutely necessary to the national existence or to 
the preservation of its freedom. 

He said that he had adopted the views of a great philo- 
sophical writer, that "war originates in the selfishness of the 
human heart, and is generally caused by ambition, avarice, 
or revenge." The great exemplars of the spirit of war and of 
its destructiveness were Alexander, Caesar, and Napoleon. 
They killed more men, made more widows and orphans, and 
created more misery in the world than any other three de 
stroyers of the race. And at the bottom of all the wars they 



Nineteenth Century- 71 

waged was that selfish and deadly ambition which petrifies 
the human heart. He said : 

"France has been afflicted in this way by the selfishness 
of her rulers throughout almost her entire history as a na- 
tion. Such kings as Francis the First, Louis the Four- 
teenth, and many others of the same character before the 
Kevolution, and the two Bonapartes after the Revolution, 
were the worst enemies of their country and of mankind and 
exhausted in their wicked wars the wealth and resources of 
France; sometimes decimated her people and filled half her 
homes with sorrow and mourning. The war made by Louis 
Napoleon on the German Empire, less than thirty years ago, 
was so wicked and foolish in its origin and so ruinous and 
humiliating to France in its result that the only way to ac- 
count for it is upon the theory that its author was under the 
influence of an uncontrollable infatuation. Nearly all the 
kings of France who had any ability were warriors; and 
only one of them in nine hundred years was at once a great 
king and a good man. Louis the Ninth, called in history St, 
Louis, occupies alone this proud preeminence. 

"How shall France attain the position to which she is 
entitled among the nations? Not by war, for war has been 
the incubus which has retarded her progress; but by peace 
and the works of peace. By devotion to science, to liter- 
ature, to agriculture, to manufactures, to all the arts of 
peace, France may and will soon take her natural place 
among the leading nations of the world. She is already tak- 
ing a long step in that direction in her great Exposition. If 
she will take for her motto in the future, "Peace is the true 
glory of nations," and steadily adhere to it, she will, at 



72 The Great Trial of the 

110 distant day, equal any nation in Europe in all that makes 
a people truly great, i)rosperous, and happy, and her chil- 
dren, scattered all over the earth, will feel a patriotic and 
exultant pride in the true and lasting glory of their native 
land. 

"As to the Philippine War, it should be regarded as an- 
other instance of the vicious influence which selfish ambi- 
tion so often exerted over the rulers of the world. I cannot 
conceive of the founders of the American Republic engag- 
ing in such a war as that. They would have considered it 
treason to liberty and to the Declaration of Independence. 

"On the 4th of July, 1776, when John Adams was advo- 
cating the Declaration of Independence from Great Britain, 
he said: 'We shall make this a glorious, an immortal day. 
^Vhen we are in our graves, our children will honor it.' He 
said much more to the same effect, and all that he predicted 
came to pass. In 1824, forty-eight years after the Declara- 
tion was made, I visited the United States and remained 
more than a year, traveling all over the country as the guest 
of the nation, and never in the history of this world was such 
an ovation given to any mortal man. The whole people rose 
up as one man to welcome me. Everywhere it was 'Wel- 
come! Welcome!! Welcome!!! Lafayette!' 

"I do not recall these scenes from vanity, but to show 
the devotion of the American people to Liberty, for it was 
Liberty they were honoring in their v.elcome to me. It is 
impossible for me to express my gratification and pride at 
hearing my name and Liberty repeated together all over the 
United States. It was as the friend of Liberty that the 
President received me. It was as the friend of Liberty that 



Nineteenth Century. T3 

the great orator of the West, Mr. Clay, as Speaker of the 
House of Representatives, welcomed me with h^s wonderful 
eloquence. And that welcome was repeated all over th-.^ 
land by old and young — by the survivors of the Revolu- 
tionary War and their children, and their children's chil- 
dren; from the venerable soldier, tottering on the brink of 
the grave, to the infant in the cradle. 

"These honors, which were far greater than I deserved, 
were bestowed upon me by the rulers and people of the Uni- 
ted States because they considered that I had been the life- 
long friend, advocate, and defender of liberty, independence, 
and self-government in the Old World and the New. 

"I was invited to assist in laying the corner-stone 
of Bunker Hill Monument on the 17th day of June, 1825. I 
heard the oration pronounced on that occasion by the great 
orator of New England, Mr. Webster. I heard him state the 
objects of the erection of that monument. I heard him say 
it was 'to show our own deep sense of the value and import- 
ance of the achievements of our ancestors; and, by present- 
ing this work of gratitude to the eye, to keep alive similar 
sentiments and to foster a constant regard for the principles 
of the Revolution.' ****** '^vg consecrate our 
work to the spirit of national independence, and we wish 
that the light of peace may rest upon it forever.' * * * 
* * * 'We wish that labor may look up he;'(' and be proud 
in the midst of its toil.' ****** 'j^^t it rise — let 
it rise till it meets the sun in his coming ; let the earliest light 
of the morning gild it and parting day linger and play upon 
its summit' I never can forget the intense earnestness of 
the speaker as he turned to me and said: 'Sir, we are as- 



74 The Great Trial of the 

sembled to commemorate the establishment of great public 
principles of liberty and to do honor to the distinguished 
dead.' Nor can I ever forget the closing sentence of the 
great orator and his invocation that the United States 
might become itself a vast and splendid monument, not of 
oppression and terror, but of wisdom, of peace, and of 
liberty, upon which the world may gaze with admiration 
forever!' 

"A great change has come over the rulers of this coun- 
try since that day. They have abandoned the doctrines of 
liberty and independence proclaimed by the Declaration, and 
repeated by Webster, and are doing their utmost to crush 
them in the Philippines. The President made war upon 
them for that very purpose, and to force upon them a govern- 
ment they do not want, and is making of their country, not 
'a monument of wisdom, of peace, and of liberty,' but 'a 
monument of oppression and terror.' 

''The relations between the Filipinos and the Ameri- 
cans at the close of the war with Spain were much the same 
as those between France and the Americans at the close of 
the Revolutionary War. France had as much right to pur- 
chase the Colonies from Great Britain as the United States 
had to purchase the Philippines from Spain. But if she 
had done so, I should have been tempted to renounce 
my country, for I would have regarded the attempt as not 
only unjust, but dastardly. The Filipinos had been fight- 
ing for liberty and independence for many years. For their 
allies to turn against them when that independence was 
nearly an accomplished fact, and destroy it by claiming 
the right, under a purchase, to sovereignty over them with- 



Nineteenth Century. '^5 

out their consent and to force them to abandon their liberty 
and independence and accept a new and foreign government 
against their determined opposition, made a very strong 
case against the author of that war. In my opinion, the ver- 
dict of the jury could not have been different under the evi- 
dence and instructions." 



SPEECH OF MR. MADISON. 

Mr. Madison said: "The power to declare war was, by 
the Constitution, conferred upon Congress. Notwithstand- 
ing this, two of our Presidents had made war without the 
authority of Congress. The Mexican War was made by Presi- 
dent Polk and the Philippine War was made by President 
McKinley. Both cases were dangerous usurpations of power, 
which it is to be hoped will never be repeated. 

"It was no justification of the President in this case to 
say that it was his right and duty to put down the rebellion 
of the Filipinos, for there was no rebellion. As already 
shown, a people cannot rebel against an authority to which 
they are not subject, nor could they be subject to an author- 
ity to whose sovereignty they had never consented. Rebel- 
lion, in the proper sense of that term, presupposes the duty 
of allegiance; and in this case there was no such duty. Sov- 
ereignty of one people over another cannot be acquired in any 
way without the consent of both parties, except by conquest 
in a just war. 

"In the beginning this was a presidential war. Its sub- 



76 The Great Trial of the 

sequent ratification by Congress made it national, but did not 
make it constitutional. The grant of the war power to Con- 
gress by the Constitution is general, but it is not unlimited. 
It is limited by the objects for which the Constitution was 
formed. These are 'to form a more perfect union, establish 
justice, insure domestic tranquillity, provide for the common 
defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the bless- 
ings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity.' 

^'Xone of these objects are promoted by the Philippine 
War. It is antagonistic to most of them, and its continuance 
is a great abuse of the war power. It is waged directly 
against the most important right proclaimed in the Declara- 
tion — the right of every people to freedom, independence, 
and self-government. 

"It has been insisted in this case that the Philippine 
Islands belong to the United States by the law of nations; 
that this country acquired them, in accordance with that law, 
by treaty with Spain. An examination of some of the lead- 
ing authorities upon international law, and an apijlication of 
that law to the evidence in this case, will show that there is 
no ground for this claim. 

"Vattel says: 'The law of nations is the science which 
teaches the rights subsisting between nations or states and 
the obligations correspondent to those rights.' 

" 'Since men are naturally equal, and a perfect equality 
prevails in their rights and obligations, as equally proceed- 
ing from Nature — nations composed of men, and considered 
as so many free persons living together in a state of nature, 
are naturally equal and inherit from Nature the same obli- 
gations and rights. Power or weakness does not in this re- 



Nineteenth Century. 77 

spect produce any difference. A dwarf is as much a man as 
a giant; a small republic is no less a sovereign State than the 
most powerful kingdom. By a necessary consequence of that 
equality, whatever is lawful for one nation is equally lawful 
for any other; and whatever is unjustifiable in the one is 
equally so in the other.' (Vattel's Law of Nations, Sec. 18.) 

"Wheaton says: 'A nation associating itself with the 
general society of nations, thereby recognizes a law common 
to all nations by which its international relations are to be 
regulated. It cannot violate this law without exposing itself 
to the danger of incurring the enmity of other nations and 
without exposing to hazard its own existence. The motive 
which induces each particular nation to observe this law 
depends upon its persuasion that other nations will observe 
towards it the same law. The jus gentium is founded upon 
reciprocity of will. It has neither law-giver nor supreme 
judge, since independent states acknowledge no superior 
human authority. Its organ and regulator is public opinion : 
its su^jreme tribunal is history', which forms at once the ram- 
part of justice and the Nemesis by which injustice is avenged. 
Its sanction, or the obligation of all men to respect it, results 
from the moral order of the universe which will not suffer 
nations and individuals to be isolated from each other, but 
constantly tends to unite the whole family of mankind in one 
great harmonious society.' (Wheaton's International Law, 
pp. 16 and 17.) 

" 'The principal in the war, the sovereign in whose name 
it has been carried on, cannot justly make a peace without 
including his allies — I mean those who have given him assist- 
ance without directly taking part in the war. 



78 The Great Trial of the 

" 'But the treaty concluded by the principal is no further 
obligatory on his allies than as they are willing to accede to 
it, unless they have given him full power to treat for them.' 
(Vattel's Law of Nations, p. 436.) 

" 'Those treaties dictated by a conquering party which 
have the effect to destroy the national existence of the van- 
quished state or deprive it of some essential right which is 
necessary to separate political existence are not obligatory 
any longer than the society affected thereby chooses to treat 
them as such.' (Pomeroy's International Law, edited by 
Prof. T. S. Woolsey, p. 348; and see pp. 350, 351, and 352, to 
the same effect.) 

" 'A nation is an aggregate of individuals, and has all 
the rights of attack and defense that a man in a state of 
nature would have by natural law. Whatever is right in 
itself such a one could lawfully do. Whatever is right in 
itself a nation may lawfully do. There being no parliament 
or tribunal of nations to agree upon rules of right, we may 
say in general that the true law of nations, as of an indi- 
vidual person, is the law of God. Certainly both communi- 
ties and individuals are bound to act justly, mercifully, and 
reasonably. Morality is incumbent upon both. The law of 
nations is summarily written in the Ten Commandments.' 
(Waples on Proceedings in Bern, p. 372.) 

" 'Every true sovereignty is in its own nature inalien- 
able. ******* Let us conclude, then, that as 
the nation alone has a right to subject itself to a foreign 
power, the right of really alienating the state can never be- 
long to the sovereign, unless it be expressly given to him by 



Nineteenth Century. T9 

the whole body of the people.' (Vattel's Law of Nations, 
pp. 31 and 32.) 

''In the case of Samuel A. Worcester vs. State of Geor- 
gia, Chief -Justice Marshall, delivering the opinion of the Su- 
preme Court of the United States, says: 

" 'These articles are associated with others recognizing 
their title to self-government. The very fact of repeated 
treaties with them recognizes it; and the settled doctrine 
of the law of nations is that a weaker power does not sur- 
render its independence — its right to self-government — by 
associating with a stronger, and taking its protection. A 
weak state, in order to provide for its safety, may place itself 
under the protection of one more powerful, without stripping 
itself of the right of government, and ceasing to be a State. 
Examples of this kind are not wanting in Europe. "Tribu- 
tary and feudatory states," says Vattelj^'do not thereby cease 
to be sovereign and independent states, so long as self-gov- 
ernment and sovereign and independent authority are left in 
the administration of the state." At the present day, more 
than one state may be considered as holding its right of self- 
government under the guarantee and protection of one or 
more allies.' (6 Peters, p. 560.) 

''Chancellor Kent defines the law of nations to be 'that 
code of public instruction which defines the rights and pre- 
scribes the duties of nations, in their intercourse with each 
other.' (1 Kent's Com., p. 1.) 

" 'Nations are equal in respect to each other, and enti- 
tled to claim equal consideration for their rights, whatever 
may be their relative dimensions or strength, or however 
greatly they may differ in government, religion, or manners.' 
6 



80 The Great Trial of the 

" 'It is a necessary consequence of this equality, that 
each nation is entitled to govern itself as it may think proper, 
and no one nation is entitled to dictate a form of government, 
or religion, or a course of internal policy, to another. 

" 'No State is entitled to take cognizance or notice of the 
domestic administration of another State or of what passes 
within it as between the government and its own subjects. 
* * * * We have several instances within time of mem- 
ory of unwarrantable and flagrant violations of the inde- 
pendence of nations.' (Kent's Com., p. 22.) 

" 'In cases where the principal jurists agree, the pre- 
sumption will be very great in favor of the solidity of their 
maxims; and no civilized nation that does not arrogantly set 
all ordinary law and justice at defiance will venture to disre- 
gard the uniform sense of the established writers on inter 
national law. England and the United States have been 
equally disposed to acknowledge the authority of the works 
of jurists writing professedly on public law and the binding 
force of the general usage and practice of nations, and the 
still greater respect due to judicial decisions recognizing and 
enforcing the law of nations.' (Kent's Com., p. 18.) 

" 'With respect to the cession of places or territories by 
treaty of peace, though the treaty operates from the making 
of it, it is a principle of public law that the national char- 
acter of the place agreed to be surrendered by treaty con- 
tinues as it was under the character of the ceding country 
until it be actually transferred. Full sovereignty cannot be 
held to have passed by the mere words of the treaty without 
actual delivery. To complete the right of property, the 
right to the thing and the possession of the thing must be 



Nineteenth Century. 81 

united. This is a necessary principle of the law of property 
in all systems of jurisprudence. There must be both the 
jus in (ad) rem and the jus in re, according to the distinction 
of the civilians, and which Barbeyrac (C) says they bor- 
rowed from the canon law. This general law of property 
applies to the right of territory no less than to other rights. 
The practice of nations is full of instances of this kind and 
several of them were stated by Sir William Scott in the opin- 
ion he gave in the case of the Fama.' (Kent's Com., p. 178.) 

"Sherston Baker, one of the latest and best writers on 
this subject, says: 'International law or the law of nations, 
jus inter gentes, may be defined to be "the rules of conduct 
regulating the intercourse of States." ' (See International 
Law, by Sir Sherston Baker, p. 14.) 

"On page 15 he says : 'It is said that the right and duties 
of states, which require an international law for their regu- 
lation and enforcement, result from the law of Nature, or 
by the will of God, and that the rules of the law, whether 
resulting from compact, custom, or usage, outwardly express 
the consent of nations to things which are naturally — that is, 
by the law of God — binding upon them.' 

"On page 19 he says: 'The first source from which are 
deduced the rules of conduct which ought to be observed 
between nations is the divine law, or principle of justice, 
which has been defined as "a constant and perpetual dispo- 
sition to render every man his; due." 

" 'Grotius lays down the broad principle that the posi- 
tive laws of nations may add to, but cannot subtract from, 
the law of Nature. Others say that human laws are only 



82 The Great Trial of the 

declaratory, but have no power over the substance of original 
justice. The principle of justice, deeply rooted in the nature 
and interest of man, pervades the whole system, and is dis- 
coverable in every part of it, even to the minutest ramifica- 
tion in a legal formality, or in the construction of an article 
in a treaty.' 

''On pages 37, 38, and 39 he says : 'The right of a sov- 
ereign state to the choice of its own rulers rests upon the 
same foundation as its right to determine the form of its own 
internal constitution ; and the interference of a foreign state 
in the one case cannot be justified except under the same 
circumstances and upon the same grounds as the other — viz., 
the immediate and pressing danger of its own independence 
and security. 

" 'But this impending or contingent danger to the gen- 
eral peace of nations, or to the independence of particular 
states, is more frequently appealed to as an excuse than as 
a justifiable reason, for foreign interference in the internal 
aflairs of others. And instead of preserving peace, such un- 
lawful interference has frequently been the cause of wars 
the most cruel and bloody that have ever stained the annals 
of history.' 

"On pages 59, 60, and 61 he says: 'A state is regarded 
in public law as capable of the same rights, duties, and obli- 
gations, with respect to other states, as individuals with re- 
spect to other individuals. Among the most important of 
these natural rights is that of acquiring, possessing, and en- 
joying property. The property of the state, of whatsoever 
description, is marked by the same characteristics relatively 
to other states as the property of individuals; that is to say, 



Nineteenth Century- 83 

it is exclusive of foreign interference and susceptible of free 
disposition. ****** a sovereign state has the same 
absolute right to dispose of its territorial or other public 
property, but it depends upon its own municipal constitu- 
tion and laws how and by what department of its govern- 
ment the disposition shall be made. ****** 
Nevertheless, in order to make such a transfer valid, 
the authority, whether de facto or de jure, must be competent 
to bind the state. Hence the necessity of examining into 
and ascertaining the powers of the rulers, as the municipal 
constitutions of different states throw many difficulties in 
the way of alienations of their public property, and particu- 
larly of their territory. Especially in modern times the con- 
sent of the governed, express or implied, is necessary before 
the transfer of their allegiance can regularly take place. 

" 'Formerly what Grotius calls patrimonial kingdoms 
were considered in the light of absolute property of particu- 
lar families, who transferred them to others at their will, 
sometimes by mortgage and sometimes by deeds of gift and 
by bequests. ****** 

" 'As the inhabitants of such kingdoms had, by their 
blind submission to their rulers, become mere adjuncts of the 
soil, the transfer of the sovereignty was considered to in- 
clude not only the right of eminent domain and the absolute 
property of the sovereign or state, but all private lands, and 
the property and services of the subjects, who were trans- 
ferred with the soil, in the same manner as a slave-holder 
may transfer his slaves and all they may possess, together 
with the title to his plantation. 

" 'But in modern times sales and transfers of national 



84 The Great Trial of the 

territory to another power can only be made by treaty or 
some solemn act of the sovereign authority of the state. 
And such transfers of territory do not include the allegiance 
of its inhabitants without their consent, express or implied, 
and a change of sovereignty does not involve any change in 
the ownership of private property. The new sovereignty, 
however, acquires the same right of eminent domain as that 
held by the former.' 

"On page 164 he says : 'But mere cession by treaty does 
not of itself operate as an immediate transfer of the alle- 
giance of the inhabitants of the ceded territory. They re- 
main subjects of the power to which their allegiance was 
originally due until the solemn delivery of the possession by 
the ceding state and an assumption of the government by 
that to which the cession is made. The actual delivery of 
the possession and the actual exercise of the powers of gov 
ernment must be clearly shown.' 

"On page 157 he says: 'The obligation of a state to ren- 
der justice to all others is a perfect obligation of strictly 
binding force at all times and under all circumstances. No 
state can relieve itself from this obligation under any pre- 
text whatever.' 

"On page 204 and 205 he says: 'War makes men public 
enemies, but it leaves in force all duties which are not neces- 
sarily suspended by the new position in which men are 
placed towards each other. Good faith is, therefore, as essen- 
tial in war as in peace, for without it hostilities could not be 
terminated with any degree of safety short of the total de- 
struction of one of the contending parties. This being ad- 
mitted as a general principle, the question arises. How far 



Nineteenth Century. 86 

may we deceive an enemy and what strategems are allow- 
able in war? Whenever we have expressly or tacitly 
engaged to speak the truth to an enemy, it would be perfidy 
in us to deceive his confidence in our sincerity. But other- 
wise we are justified in leading him into error, either by 
words or actions.' 

"On pages 350 and 351 he says: 'Military occupation 
suspends the sovereignty and dominion of the former owner 
so long as the conquered territory remains in the possession 
of the conqueror, or in that of his allies. The temporary do- 
minion of the latter completely excludes, for the time being, 
the original dominion of the former. The vanquished 
sovereign, therefore, has no power as against the conqueror 
to alienate any part of his own territory which may be at 
the time in the possession of the latter. If the conquest be 
completed or confirmed, the title passes to the conqueror pre- 
cisely as it was when the latter first acquired the possession. 
No other party can claim any right over it arising from any 
conveyance or transfer from the vanquished while it was in 
the conqueror's possession. But if it be surrendered up to 
the former owner or recovered by him, such conveyance 
would become valid, for the alienor would not be permitted 
to deny his own act. It is a principle of jurisprudence that 
the jus in re (the possession of) and the jus ad rem (the right 
to) the thing alienated are necessary in the grantor in order 
to constitute a complete title. During military occupation 
these exist together neither in the original owner nor in the 
conqueror. The title conveyed by either is, therefore, im- 
perfect; if by the former, it is made good by a restoration of 



86 TJie Great Trial of the 

the conquest; and if by the latter, it is completed by a con- 
firmation of the conquest.' 

"Prof. Woolsey, one of the highest authorities on this 
subject says: 'A state's territorial right gives no power to 
the ruler to alienate a part of the territory in the way of bar 
ter or sale, as was done in feudal times. In other words, the 
right is a public or political, and not a personal one. Nor, in 
justice, can the state itself alienate a portion of its territory 
without the consent of the inhabitants upon the same, and if 
this is done after conquest, it is only the acknowledgment 
of an unavoidable fact' (Woolsey on International Law, 
p. 65.) 

"If we apply the rules of international law laid down 
in the foregoing citations to the facts established in this 
case, we will find that the cession of the Philippine Islands 
to the United States by Spain in the treaty of Paris 
conveyed no title for the following reasons: 

"First — Spain did not, and could not, deliver to the Uni- 
ted States possession of the territory ceded, nearly all of it 
being then in possession of the Filipinos and held by them 
adversely to Spain and for themselves. 

"Second — The Filipinos had been the allies of the United 
States in the war with Spain and were not parties to the 
treaty, and therefore could not be bound by it. 

"Third — They never consented to the treaty nor to the 
sovereignty of the United States, but always claimed and in- 
sisted upon their right to freedom, independence, and self- 
government, against Spain, the United States and all the 
world. 



Nineteenth Century. ^7 

"It is clear without further argument, that in making 
and waging war upon the Filipinos to acquire possession 
and control of their country, the military power of the Uni- 
ted States violated that 'perfect obligation of a state' which 
Sherston Baker says is 'of strictly binding force at all times 
and under all circumstances.' 

"It is another proof of the statement of Prof. Hall, that 
the rules of international law 'are often quietly ignored or 
brutally disregarded.' 

"In fact, this was virtually admitted by Senator Carter 
when he said: 'This is a practical age. We are going to 
deal with the question on the basis of dollars and cents. 
Neither religion nor sentiment will have much influence in 
determining the verdict. The great question will be, Will it 
pay?' 

"If there are any in this vast assembly who are not sat- 
isfied to have this question settled by the law of nations, it 
may be said that there is for them and for all true Ameri- 
cans a higher law than this, by which they are bound to con- 
cede to the Filipinos the right to freedom, independence, 
and self-government. That law is the Declaration of Inde- 
pendence. Its promulgation was the most solemn recogni- 
tion of the rights of man ever made. Upon its truths this 
nation was founded. In dealing with other nations and peo- 
ples we are absolutely concluded by its principles. 

"Our fathers declared that 'all men' are endowed 
by their Creator with the rights they enumerated. That en- 
dowment is universal and perpetual and binding always and 
everywhere. Whoever attempts to deprive any nation or 



88 The Or eat Trial of the 

people of its benefits is opposed to the government of the 
Great Author of the endowment. 

"Our fathers built our system of self-government upon 
that endowment of the Creator. Whoever, in any position, 
high or low, private or official, attempts to overthrow 
or undermine it, or in any way to defeat its operation, is an 
enemy to his country, for he would destroy the foundation 
upon which all of our institutions rest. That great boon is 
a shield and protection to the rights of all men or of none. 
We cannot justly claim it for ourselves and deny it to 
others. 

''The doctrine that the Constitution does not confer up- 
on Congress or the President the power to make and carry 
on wars of aggression and aggrandizement is supported by 
the authority of the highest tribunal in our country. In the 
case of Fleming & Marshall vs. Page (9th Howard, pp. 
614-615), the Supreme Court of the United States says: 

" 'The country in question had been conquered in war. 
But the genius and character of our institutions are peace- 
ful and the power to declare war was not conferred upon 
Congress for the purpose of aggression or aggrandiaement, 
but to enable the general government to vindicate by arms, 
if it should become necessary, its own rights and the rights 
of its citizens. A war, therefore, declared by Congress can 
never be presumed to be waged for the purpose of conquest 
or the acquisition of territory; nor does the law declaring 
the war imply an authority to the President to enlarge the 
limits of the United States by subjugating the enemy's 
country. 

"'The United States, it is true, may extend its 



Nineteenth Century. 89 

boundaries by conquest or treaty, and may demand the ces- 
sion of territory as the condition of peace in order to indem- 
nify its citizens for the injuries they have suffered or to re- 
imburse the government for the expenses of the war. But 
this can be done only by the treaty-maliing power or 
the legislative authority, and is not a part of the power con- 
ferred upon the President by declaration of war. His duty 
and his power are purely military.' 

"This seems sufficiently clear, for it was not necessary 
for the United States to make war upon the Filipinos to 
vindicate its own rights and the rights of its citizens. The 
war was merely one of aggression and conquest and for the 
acquisition of territory to which, as against the Filipinos, 
the United States had no valid right whatever. 

"What the Court says about the right of the United 
States to extend its boundaries by conquest or treaty and to 
demand the cession of territory as the condition of peace in 
order to indemnify its citizens for the injuries they have suf- 
fered, etc., does not help the case as against the Filipinos, 
for the United States had suffered no injury from them. On 
the contrary, it had received much benefit. If the United 
States had a right to indemnity against Spain, no treaty be- 
tween these parties could bind the persons or property or 
territory of the Filipinos. Spain had neither the posses- 
sion nor the right to possess the one-hundredth part of those 
islands, nor could the treaty give the United States title to 
any part of them against the Filipinos without the con- 
sent of the latter, as already often stated in this discussion. 

"I consider the question of the extent of the power of 
Congress, under the Constitution, to declare and wage war 



90 The Great Trial of the 

so important that, with the indulgence of the meeting, I 
would say something more on that subject before closing. 

"Many years ago I gave in 'The Federalist' (No. 40) two 
rules of construction, the application of which ought to set- 
tle the question whether the power of Congress to declare 
war is unlimited. The rules are these, and are dictated by 
plain reason as well as founded on legal maxims: The one 
is that every part of the expression ought, if possible, to 
be allowed some meaning, and be made to conspire to 
some common end. The other is, that where the sev- 
eral parts cannot be made to coincide, the less important 
should give way to the more important part; the means 
should be sacrificed to the end, rather than the end to the 
means. 

"Let the most scrupulous expositors of the delegated 
powers answer whether it is of most importance that the 
rights enumerated in the Preamble to the Constitution 
should be preserved, or that Congress should have unlimited 
power to declare war, or to authorize the President to make 
war upon any people. Let them answer whether the preser 
vation of the enumerated rights and blessings for which the 
Constitution was formed, or the unlimited exercise of the 
war power by Congress, is the more important. Which is 
the more important, the end or the means? Or rather, 
which is the more important, the ends to be attained, or the 
extreme and arbitrary exercise of one of the means provided 
by the Constitution to attain them? There can be but one 
answer to these questions. 

"It is not intended to undervalue the war power, but to 



Nineteenth Century. ®1 

guard against its abuse. It is not intended to deny the 
right and duty of Congress to exercise its discretion in de- 
claring and waging war, but to insist that its discretion 
should be reasonably exercised and that the wars declared 
by it must be for objects contemplated by the Constitution. 
"The power given the courts and judges to grant injunc- 
tions is a salutary one. But an arbitrary and unjust judge 
or court may so abuse his discretion as to make what was in- 
tended as a benefit a curse and a terror to the people. That 
would be an illegal exercise of a legal right. 

"So the power of Congress to declare war may be 
so abused as to become an unconstitutional exercise of a con- 
stitutional power. 

"The executive of the nation is the natural, proper, and 
constitutional commander-in-chief of its military force. But 
if, in exercising that command, he so manages as to involve 
his country in war with another people, he is guilty of usur- 
pation and is liable for all the consequences which follow his 
unconstitutional action. Such, as I understand from the evi- 
dence, is the situation in the present case. 

"The foregoing view of the limit and proper exercise of 
the war power under our Constitution is strengthened by a 
consideration of the history and character of the men who 
formed that Constitution. They were intelligent, patriotic 
men, devoted to liberty and free government, and labored 
long and earnestly to frame a constitution which would se- 
cure these blessings to themselves and their posterity for- 
ever. Several of them were signers of the Declaration of In- 
dependence, and most of them had been students of history 



92 TJie Great Trial of the 

and acquainted with the science and practice of government 
for many years. 

"It is not reasonable to suppose that such men would 
confer upon any department of the government they framed 
such a tremendous and dangerous power as unlimited discre- 
tion in making and waging war. Such a power would be un- 
controllable and despotic, and could be used to defeat the ob- 
jects for which the Constitution was formed. The logical 
conclusion is that this power was not intended to be, and 
was not, conferred upon Congress, and that its exercise 
would be unconstitutional." 

Mr. Madison's manner was earnest but uuimpassioned. 
He commanded the most profound attention, and I deeply 
regret my inability to reproduce his argument entire, or to 
give an adequate idea of its clearness and force. 



COUNT TOLSTOI'S SPEECH. 

Count Tolstoi said that he had been in the habit of giv- 
ing his views upon the subject of war freely for many years. 
That if any excuse or apology were necessary to justify him 
in using great plainness of speech upon the present oc- 
casion, the extreme abuse of the jury indulged in at the po- 
litical meeting held by some of the friends of the President 
last night might furnish it. 

"Last year," he said, "in answer to a letter, I again gave 
my opinions upon the subject of war; a part of what I then 



Nineteenth Century. d3 

said is applicable to the present occasion, and I will repeat 
it substantially as it was then given : 

" 'Enlightened, sensible, good Christian people, who in- 
culcate the principle of love and brotherhood, who regard 
murder as an awful crime, who, with very few exceptions, 
are unable to kill an animal — all these people suddenly, un- 
der those conditions when these crimes are called war, not 
only acknowledge the destruction, j^lunder, and killing of 
people as right and legal, but themselves contribute towards 
these plunders and murders, prepare themselves for them, 
take part in them, are proud of them. 

" *If a man act in accordance with that which is dictated 
to him by his reason, his conscience, and his God, only the 
very best can result for himself and for the world. 

" 'People complain of the evil conditions of life in our 
Christian world, but is it possible for it to be otherwise 
when all of us acknowledge not only that fundamental, di- 
vine law proclaimed some thousands of years ago, "Thou 
shalt not kill," but also the law of love and brotherhood of 
all men; and when, notwithstanding this, every man in our 
European world practically disavows this fundamental di- 
vine law, acknowledged by him, and, at the command 
of president, emperor, or minister, gf Nicholas or William, 
arrays himself in an idiotic costume, takes an instrument of 
murder, and says, ''Here I am, ready to injure, ruin, or kill 
anyone I am ordered to." 

" 'Governments do not desire the settlement of mis- 
understandings; if there be none, they invent some in order 
to have a pretext to keep up the army on which their power 



94: The Great Trial of the 

is based. Tribunals and arbitration serve but to divert the 
attention of the workers and sufferers, etc., etc. 

" 'International relations are purposely always more and 
more complicated, which must bring about war; peaceful 
countries are being ransacked without the least cause; every 
year, in some place or other, plunders and murders take 
place, and all live in constant dread of general and mutual 
robbery and plunder. 

" 'The plunderers of the world, in order to justify their 
teachings that war — i. e., murder — is permissible, are loud in 
proclaiming their adhesion to the Christian faith. But the 
Christian religion is in its very nature opposed to murder 
and violence. To overcome these seemingly grave discrep- 
ancies between their own teachings and those of Christ, 
what better way is there than to cripple and distort Christ's 
own religion, hiding its real meaning from the masses for 
whom the Savior died? 

"" This barbaric distortion began in Russia as early as 
the reign of Czar Constantine, that royal monster who, in- 
stead of being hung, was canonized. His posterity, our 
present Czars, do their best, of course, to preserve this sacri- 
legious fraud. They stand as an impenetrable barrier be- 
tween the people and the true meaning of Christianity, lest 
there should come a time when the people — that big-hearted, 
million-headed child — should discover that the government, 
with its taxes, its soldiers, its prisons, its false priests, is not 
only no such pillar of Christianity as it would like to be con- 
sidered, but its bitterest foe. 

" 'This libel on Christianity is the mother of all the lies 



Nineteenth Century. 95 

and base decoctions that bewilder our minds and all the 
miseries our nation is suffering from, 

"It is only necessary for the people to awake in or- 
der to realize all the whole horror and insanity of that 
which they have been and are doing; and, having realized 
this, to cease that evil which they themselves abhor and 
which is ruining them. If only they were to refrain from the 
evil which they themselves detest — i. e., supporting war by 
paying taxes and by personal service — those ruling impost- 
ors who first corrupt and then oppress them, would, of them- 
selves, naturally vanish like owls before the daylight; and 
then would be established those new, humane, brotherly con- 
ditions of life for which Christendom — weary of suffering, 
exhausted by deceit and lost in insoluble contradictions — 
is longing.' 

"The letter to which I have referred was written princi- 
pally with reference to the continent of Europe and Great 
Britain. The last named nation is an anomaly in what is 
called the civilized and Christian world. In the last three 
hundred years that country has produced many men and wo- 
men in the various professions and pursuits of life distin- 
guished for learning, morals, or religion, and sometimes for 
every accomplishment and every virtue, who have done much 
for their country and their race. Among the common people 
also there have always been many humane, good citizens. 

"But the ruling classes, especially those who for the 

time being governed that country, including nearly all of 

their kings since Alfred the Great, who had any ability, have 

always been cold-blooded, selfish, and brutal. England 

adopted the Christian religion nearly twelve hundred years 
7 



96 The Great Trial of the 

ago, and since Henry the Eighth her kings have been at the 
head of the national church and often at the head of the 
Protestant world; yet a large proportion of them were not 
only unfit to rule, but were unfit to live. 

"The crimes of these men were horrible! Their history 
is sickening. It was their fashion, for hundreds of years, to 
torture their enemies and those who opposed them, before 
putting them to death, and to mutilate their bodies after. 
They considered all weak nations, all over the globe, their 
legitimate prey, and robbed and murdered them at will. 
Since the revolution of 1688 they have ceased to practice tor- 
ture and mutilation, but to this very hour they have con- 
tinued to practice robbery and murder wherever they have 
been opposed in their efforts to extend their territory and 
trade, 

"In spite of all the improvements she has made in 
science, literature, and art, in spite of all her professions of 
morality and religion, in spite of all the good and great men 
and women whose names adorn her history, England re- 
mains to-day what she has been for nearly a thousand years 
— the great robber nation of the world. 

"A very discriminating French writer, in speaking of 
the civilization of the English people and the barbarism of 
the English government, expresses the contrast as 'that psy- 
chological paradox of the Anglo-Saxon race whose individ- 
ual virtues are great and strong, but whose public hypocrisy 
is abominable and whose national selfishness is next to vil- 
lainy.' Twenty generations of English history prove that the 
Frenchman is right and that rapacity is the predominating 



Nineteenth Century. ^ ' 

feature of England's foreign policy. If any evidence were 
needed that a sordid and soulless commercialism still rules 
her, the war in South Africa to crush out small republics by 
this nation, which boasts of being a land of freedom, would 
be ample proof. 

"I rejoice in the reverses she has received there, 
and earnestly hope that her eventual failure may be so com- 
plete and overwhelming that she will abandon forever the 
old barbarous policy she inherited from the Angles, the Sax- 
ons, the Danes, and the Normans. I say this without malice 
and in the interest of humanity. Her being driven out of 
France was a benefit to her and to the world. Her being 
driven out of the thirteen North American colonies was bet- 
ter still. If she is driven out of South Africa, it will have a 
powerful influence for good upon her and result in putting 
an end to the unjust and cruel policy she has so long pursued. 
It will certainly break her prestige and greatly reduce her 
power to do mischief. She will then have all she can do to 
hold India and her other remote possessions. 

"The people of the United States are called Anglo- 
Saxons. It would be more nearly correct to call them Anglo- 
Americans, for seventy years after their declaration of inde- 
pendence of England they manifested little of the piratical 
and brutal nature which characterized the Saxon. They 
founded their nation upon the right of all peoples to liberty, 
independence, and self-government, and, till a few years 
past, considered the truths of their great Declaration sacred. 
They admitted that negro slavery, as it existed in nearly all 
the States, was an inconsistency, but affirmed that it was 



98 The Great Trial of the 

planted here by England and the nations of Europe and that 
it had taken such deep root that it could not be eradicated. 
Their peculiar relations to the Indian tribes at and before the 
formation of their national government was another condi- 
tion to which, as they said, they were unable to apply in prac- 
tice their doctrines of the rights of man. But they started 
at the first moment of their national existence at a point of 
political civilization which no other nation ever reached, and 
for two generations they made no attempt to interfere with 
the liberty and independence of any other people, or forcibly 
to deprive any foreign nation of any part of its terri- 
tory. But in 1846 President Polk, as commander-in-chief 
of the United States Army, precipitated a war with Mexico 
for the purpose of acquiring territory, and after the conquest 
of that country under the thin disguise of a purchase the Uni- 
ted States took from Mexico a very large and valuable terri- 
tory, which was really the spoils of an infamous war. In 
that transaction the Americans exhibited the rapacity of the 
Saxon. 

"The war against the Filipinos was begun in the same 
way and for the same object, and is a worse exhibition of the 
same spirit. In fact, as some American writer has well said, 
'It is one of the worst cases of territorial piracy in the history 
of the world. Shame, everlasting shame and contempt, up- 
on any professedly Christian ruler who would deliberately 
perpetrate such an outrage as that!' 

"I believe that the author of this war is guilty of the 
willful and deliberate murder of every man and boy who has 
been killed in it or who has come to his death by wounds or 
sickness paused by it. And I believe further, that now is the 



Nineteenth Century. 99 

time to put a stop to such crimes, if ever they are to be 
stopped. 

"America has been the great example and great hope of 
the lovers of liberty and humanity and self-government 
throughout the world. She started gloriously on her high 
career as a nation. Her great statesmen held her steadily to 
the principles upon which she was founded. She had more 
great and good chief magistrates in one hundred years than 
Great Britain has had in five hundred, and it would be the 
saddest picture in the book of time if she should continue in 
the downward road upon which she has now entered. Noth- 
ing but the most determined effort can save her, for it is as 
true of nations as it is of individuals, as the history of the 
world has demonstrated that 

" 'The gates of hell are open night and day, 
Smooth's the descent and easy is the way; 
But to return and view the cheerful skies. 
In this the task and mighty labor lies.' 

"An English historian, in speaking of the despotism of 
Henry the Eighth, says: 'All sense of loyalty to England, to 
its freedom, to its institutions, has utterly passed away. The 
one duty which fills the statesman's mind is a duty to his 
prince, a prince whose personal will and appetite were over- 
riding the highest interests of the state, trampling under foot 
the wisest councils, and crushing with the blind ingratitude 
of a fate the servants who opposed him.' 

"The distinction here made by the historian between loy- 
alty to one's country and devotion to an unprincipled ruler, 
who would sacrifice the best interests of that country to 
gratify himself, should never be forgotten. It is the sup- 



100 The Great Trial of the 

port, both in war and in peace, of the highest interests and 
most lasting good of the nation, and not the support of any 
ruler, that makes a man a true patriot. It is a delusion to 
suppose that, because the ruler or rulers of a country have 
plunged it into an unjust, disgraceful, and ruinous war, its 
citizens are bound to support them and are disloyal if they 
do not. The makers and supporters of unjust wars use the 
word 'patriotism' as a ruse to wheedle the people into the sup- 
port of bad measures, which, as good citizens, they are bound 
to and would oppose if they were not frightened from their 
propriety by the dread of being called traitors for their op- 
position. Traitor is a dangerous word and should be handled 
very carefully. It is a two-edged sword and is applicable to 
rulers as well as ruled, when the occasion demands it. 

"I am a Russian and have denounced the arbitrary and 
unjust measures of the Czars of my country for many years 
— their war measures more than any others — and shall con- 
tinue to do it as long as I live. If the words 'patriot' and 
'traitor' are to be used here, the Czar is not the patriot and 
I am not the traitor. Henry the Eighth had Sir Thomas 
Moore beheaded for treason for refusing to support him in 
one of his arbitrary measures, but Moore was the patriot and 
Henry was the traitor. President Polk made the Mexican 
War and Mr. Lincoln opposed it and was called a traitor. If 
there was any treason in that business, I will submit the 
question to the people of the United States to decide who 
was the traitor. 

"The present chief magistrate of the United States made 
and is now prosecuting a war against the inhabitants of the 



Nineteenth Century. 101 

Philippine Islands, because they claim the right to freedom 
and independence and self-government and refuse to be gov- 
erned by him. In doing this he is making war upon the Dec- 
laration of Independence, upon the constitution of his coun- 
try, and upon the very principles upon which the government 
was founded. There are millions of people in the United 
States who believe that war is unjust and unconstitutional, 
and that in its ultimate effects and consequences it will be 
ruinous to their country. They therefore oppose it. For 
this the President, in his travels through the country, in his 
numerous speeches, intimates and implies that they are trait- 
ors; and some of his supporters say it plainly. If I were an 
American as I am a Russian, and the President should call 
me a traitor for opposing his foolish and wicked war, I would 
undertake, by word and pen, to make him carry to the end of 
his days the mark of being himself a traitor as plainly as if 
the word were branded upon his forehead. 

"It seems to me almost impossible that any considera- 
ble proportion of the American people can be imposed 
upon much longer by the enormous deceit, the stupendous 
lie, that this war is in favor of their country. It is against 
it and against everything good in the political, moral, and 
religious world. 

"It is understood that the President did not originally 
intend to claim the Philippines, much less to take them by 
what he called 'criminal aggression.' Their appropriation 
was urged upon him by politicians who thought their seizure 
would be popular, and by speculators and traders who ex- 
pected to profit by it, and by well-meaning people who did 



102 The Great Trial of the 

not realize the enormity of the spoliation. It is also known 
that many of his friends strongly opposed it, and that one, 
Senator Sewell, of New Jersey, begged him, 'For God's sake, 
Mr. President, recall Dewey and let those islands alone!' 
There is a world of meaning in that exclamation. It is also 
believed, upon good evidence, that the robbery was finally 
decided upon by the influence of the British government. If 
this is true, it wa^s a bad day for the world when that selfish 
monarchy induced the great American republic to adopt her 
cold-blooded and rapacious policy. 

"The citizens of the United States are the most intelli- 
gent people in the world. It is reasonable to conclude that 
the delusion under which many of them have been laboring, 
that patriotism requires them to support a war begun and 
waged for spoil and by the advice of another nation and for 
her benefit, must pass away. 

"It is to be hoped that their reason and sense of justice 
will return to them, that the principles of those great Presi- 
dents, Washington, Jefferson, and Lincoln, will be reestab- 
lished in the government of the United States, and that all 
its departments may be filled with men who will be faith- 
ful to their own country and devoted to the everlasting- 
truths of their Declaration of Independence." 



GENERAL WASHINGTON'S SPEECH. 

General Washington was the next speaker. He said: 
"In discussing the importance of peace with all nations and 
the danger of being hurried into war by passion and preju- 



'Nineteenth Century. 103 

dice, in mj farewell address I stated that the nation, 
prompted by ill will and resentment, sometimes impels to 
war the government contrary to the best calculations of pol- 
icy. The government sometimes participates in the national 
propensity and adopts, through passion, what reason would 
reject. 

*^That statement grew out of the relations of the United 
States at that time to foreign nations, but was intended as a 
general truth, and has been entirely applicable to this coun- 
try since the beginning of the agitation against Spain. There 
was, to use Mr. Clay's expression, no 'dire necessity' for our 
war with Spain. Spain, England, or Russia had, upon prin- 
ciple, the same right to make war upon the United States for 
the cruelty with which we treated the negroes and the rob- 
bery we practiced upon the Indians, that we had to make 
war upon Spain for her robbery of and cruelty to the Cubans. 

"The President, according to his own public and positive 
statement, was opposed to that war. The quotation I have 
made fits the origin of the war with Spain as well as it fit- 
ted the occasion for which it was made. That war, in my 
opinion, was not the offspring of reason or principle or sound 
policy. Its professed object was to secure to the Cubans the 
blessings of freedom and self-government. There is not, at; 
present, very much probability of any other fate for Cuba 
than a change of masters. But, however that may be, and 
however specious and plausible may have been the reasons 
for the war with Spain, and however much good citizens may 
have been misled by them, I think it is perfectly clear that 
the war upon the Filipinos, because they insist upon their 



104 The Great Trial of the 

right to freedom and self-government and refuse to submit 
themselves and their country to the United States, is in di- 
rect conflict with our Declaration of Independence, with 
natural right, and with the revealed will of the Governor of 
the Universe. 

"It was with great regret that I felt compelled to find a 
verdict against the President of the United States. I still 
think that it was right. If sustained by the people and Con- 
gress, it may avert from our country the punishment which 
always follows great national crimes when unrepented of 
and unatoned for." 



BISHOP SIMPSON'S ADDRESS. 

"The subject which the meeting had been called to con- 
sider has been so thoroughly discussed that I do not wish to 
say much in conclusion, except upon one point. That point 
was raised by Mr. Lincoln. He said: 'In discussing the 
question of war, Christianity seemed to be a failure.' 

"I had occasion many years since to preach a ser- 
mon upon that subject, and time has confirmed me in 
the views I then expressed. It seems to me that I can do 
nothing better in closing this meeting than to give the views 
I then expressed, enlarged and ripened by subsequent 
experience: 

" The advent of Christ was predicted 4,000 years before 
He appeared. This prediction was repeated by the prophet 
Isaiah long afterwards in perhaps the grandest propheoy 



Nineteenth Century. 105 

ever uttered. I will read a part of it for your instruction 
and my own : 

" '3. He is despised and rejected of men; a man of sor- 
rows, and acquainted with grief; and we hid as it were our 
faces from him; he was despised, and we esteemed him not. 

" *4. Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our 
sorrows; yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and 
afflicted. 

" '5. But he was wounded for our transgressions, he 
was bruised for our iniquities : the chastisement of our peace 
was upon him ; and with his stripes we are healed. 

"*6. All we like sheep have gone astray; have turned 
every one to his own way ; and the Lord hath laid on him the 
iniquity of us all, 

" '7. He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet 
he opened not his mouth; he is brought as a lamb to 
the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is dumb, so 
he opened not his mouth. 

'' '8. He was taken from prison and from judgment: 
and who shall declare his generation? for he was cut off out 
of the land of the living: for the transgression of my people 
was he stricken. 

" '9. And he made his grave with the wicked, and with 
the rich in his death; because he had done no violence, 
neither was any deceit in his mouth. 

" *10. Yet it pleased the Lord to bruise him ; he hath 
put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering 
for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and 
the pleasure of the Lord shall prosper in his hand. 



106 The Great Trial of the 

" '11. He shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall 
be satisfied: by his knowledge shall my righteous servant 
justify many; for he shall bear their iniquities.' 

"Nineteen hundred years ago, in fulfillment of this 
prophecy, Christ came and performed His mission. He 
spent his life in doing good and in teaching the best system 
of morals and politics and religion ever known among men, 
and sent His disciples to proclaim it throughout the world. 

"All the suffering, sorrow, humiliation, and shame pre- 
dicted by the prophet came upon him. He lived a perfect 
life and died an infamous death. The greatest writers who 
deny His divinity admit the grandeur and glory of His char- 
acter, and that He was the greatest and best of created be- 
ings. Few have been so hardy as to deny that the rules 
he left for the guidance of our race, if universally followed, 
would transform the earth and lead to universal peace and 
happiness. 

"No level-headed man can deny this who considers well 
the radical nature of the teaching of Christ and the solid and 
eternal foundation upon which His religion is based. Its 
foundation is love. Not the love of parent and child, of hus- 
band or wife, of relative or friend or country, but the love of 
all mankind as brethren, having the same origin and the 
same destiny. 

"It is not easy to realize the far-reaching and revolu- 
tionary nature of the teaching of Christ, if carried, as He in- 
tended it should be, into every relation of life, including the 
laws, politics, and diplomacy of every government. And un- 
less it is in its influence thus all-pervading, it falls far short 



Nineteenth Century. 107 

of its mission, and is indeed, to use the expression of Mr. Lin- 
coln, 'a failure.' The mission of Christ was to remove evil 
from the earth, to spread abroad peace and truth. 

"I need not take the time of such an audience as this to 
prove that so far the gospel has not succeeded in removing 
evil and spreading truth and peace throughout the world. 
The world is full of evil, and two of the most unjust wars in 
history are now being waged by the two greatest nations, 
which are nominally Christian, and all the great nations 
of the world are armed to the teeth for war. More than 
sixty-two generations have passed away since Clirist sent 
His apostles to teach all nations, and yet how little has really 
been accomplished in morals or religion ! 

"Take uncivilized countries where the gospel has been 
preached: how little effect it has had among them! Come 
to civilized lands where the gospel is heard: how little in- 
fluence it has had! what corruption there is in high places! 
Look at society: even among men who pretend to be Chris- 
tians, how much selfishness there is! how much covetous- 
ness! See how wickedness reigns in the world! What is 
the trouble? Why has the progress of the Gospel been so 
slow? 

"I answer that the strongest reason is that the men who 
profess to be Christians are such imperfect specimens of 
Christianity. Christ selected twelve apostles; what were 
they? In the hour of danger one of them cursed and swore. 
When Jesus rose from the dead, another doubted. See their 
selfishness! Trying, some of them, to be greater than the 
rest; wanting, some of them, to sit at His right hand, and 



108 y/ie areat Trial of the 

others at his left. How little idea had they of the purity 
and spirituality of His kingdom! They longed for a tem- 
poral power. Take the church organizations: the leading 
men of the church, how inefficient! And there is so little 
efficiency in the church as an organization. Go through it; 
go into your stores and offices: how little is said of Christ! 
how little faith is manifested! And they say, 'What can the 
church accomplish?' How little faith that the work can be 
done! We assemble in our congregations, but we have no 
thought that the city can be conquered. 

"Vice is running down our streets; degradation has its 
home in our garrets and cellars. Ah! well, if it were con- 
fined to garrets and cellars; but vice in its most hideous 
forms has its home in your brown-stone houses, your costly 
residences, 

"Take the literature: how obscene much of it is, and 
how poisoning! Take the man who will be a true Christian, 
a living earnest man in his shop, his business, his politics, 
everywhere, who talks of Jesus and the triumphs of His cross 
as he talks of business and trade: he is a singular man and 
the world wonders at him. 

"I have spoken of covetousness. Perhaps there is no 
more general, all-pervading vice, and it leads to so 
much crime. We are told that the love of money is the root 
of all evil. The churches are full of covetousness and the 
love of money. In fact, it has come to pass that money gov- 
erns nearly every business, political, literary, and religious 
organization in this country. Indeed, it controls the gov- 
ernment itself and often decides state and national elections. 



Nineteenth Century. 109 

It elects United States senators and controls them after they 
are elected. 

''Money was at the bottom of the Philippine and Boer 
Avars and all the horrors and infamy they have brought in 
their train. What did the church in England and America 
do to prevent these wars? Nothing! On the contrary, their 
influence was the other way, and the blood of thousands of 
Filipinos and Americans shed in that unhallowed war is 
crying to heaven against the churches as well as against the 
speculators, politicians, and traders who made it. The Ser- 
mon on the Mount, Paul's sermon on the absolute necessity 
of charity (or love), the exhortations of all the apostles, the 
dying command of Christ to 'put up the sword, that all who 
took the sword should perish by the sword,' have bec-n so far 
inadequate to the task of turning the so-called Chris- 
tian churches against this wicked Philippine War. 

"This state of things is partly the fault of the clergy, but 
more the fault of the men upon whom the clergy depend. A 
distinguished clergyman states the case as follows : 

" 'Almost more than any other class, the men who minis- 
ter from our pulpits are becoming the helpless victims of the 
most brutal intimidations of money interests. If they preach 
the truth which Jesus preached, they will disrupt their con- 
gregations, destroy their own reputations, and will be practi- 
cally blacklisted by the churches. Long years of prepara 
tion are required for their calling, and the financial returns 
to ability are small. Helpless economic dependence is not a 
good school in which to train men for spiritual boldness and 
liberty. With the doors of the church closed against him, 
after years of preparation, and with a dependent family 



110 The Great TiHal of the 

about him, it is not wonderful that the pastor seeks truth in 
the terms of the existing order.' 

"An illustration of the correctness of the foregoing state- 
ment occurred recently in one of our cities in a large congre- 
gation. In the forenoon the pastor preached against war. 
Some of the leading members of the church interviewed him 
during the day, and at night he preached in favor of war. 
But illustrations are not necessary. The entire history of 
Christianity proves the tremendous influence that pecuniary 
interest has over the clergy and the people. That history is 
darkened by the shadows of many apostates, great and small, 
who for filthy lucre, popularity, or office abandoned the ser- 
vice of God and enlisted under the bloody banners of Mars 
and Moloch. 

"It is true that there have been in all ages, and now are, 
noble examples of men who have not bowed the knee to these 
blood-thirsty deities. There are men in this country who 
would sacrifice their salaries and their lives, if necessary, be- 
fore they would preach in favor of such an abomination as 
this Philippine War, but they are sadly in the minority. At 
present nearly every large and popular church organization 
goes with the multitude. The really good people among 
them, who take Christ at His word and do not attempt to 
fritter away His meaning, do not count for much. The or- 
ganization, as a whole, is governed by fashion and by money, 
and is not a very congenial place for poor people, no mat- 
ter how good they may be. If Christ should suddenly enter 
a fashionable church. He would not be welcome. If He were 
given a seat at all, it would be as far back as possible. 

"The conversion of the world must be commenced in the 



'Nineteenth Century. Ill 

churches, and first of all among the preachers. When they 
are truly converted, when they become actual Christians, 
when they become sanctified by the truth and the truth has 
made them free to carry out and practice their religion 
everywhere and live it all the time, then they will have cour- 
age to declare the whole counsel of God. Then they will 
boldly preach against fraud and falsehood and hypocrisy, 
against covetousuess, against the love of money, against de- 
votion to fashion; in favor of the love described, commanded, 
and practiced by Christ, and the charity preached by Paul ; 
and against war, the greatest of evils — war which embodies 
in itself or carries in its train nearly all evils and all crimes 
— war which is the lowest, coarsest, most vulgar and brutal 
of all the occupations of man — war which had its origin with 
the fallen angels and is the proper profession of devils only. 

"The popular notion that war is a great promoter of 
civilization is another reason for the demoralization of the 
Christian world. The idea is absurd. War is the prolific 
fountain of vice and crime, as already shown. War is al- 
most the embodiment of barbarism. How can civilization be 
promoted by its opj)osite, barbarism? Christ exposed the 
fallacy of that kind of reasoning when He exploded the 
charge of His enemies that He cast out devils by Beelzebub, 
the prince of devils. 

"Recently the general assembly of the Presbyterian 
Church addressed a petition to the President against the 
enormous increase of saloons and intemperance in Manila 
since its occupancy by the American Army. This is like lock- 
ing the stable door after the horse has been stolen.' If the 

clergy of the United States had been as earnest in opposing 
8 



112 TJie Great Trial of the 

the beginning of the war as they now are in trying to abate 
one of its many evil consequences, their united and de- 
termined influence might have prevented it, and the four 
hundred saloons of which they complain would not have 
been started. The war caused the saloons, and their apathy 
is, to a considerable extent, responsible for the war. 

''I say their apathy, because, to their credit be it spoken, 
a large majority of them did not really preach in favor of it. 
That kind of preachers are not very numerous in the Chris- 
tian church, and it is well that they are not. Of all the mon- 
strosities this world exhibits, a preacher of the gospel of the 
Prince of Peace who advocates a foreign war of aggression 
and conquest to acquire territory, extend commerce, and in- 
crease trade and wealth, in the name of Christian civiliza- 
tion, is perhaps the greatest. It is diflScult to conceive of a 
greater moral paradox. Such preachers crucify the Son of 
God afresh and put Him to an open shame. Of whom Isaiah 
said: 'Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; 
that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that 
put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!' And against 
whom Christ hurled that terrible denunciation: 'Woe unto 
you Scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites!' 'Ye serpents, ye 
generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of 
hell?' 

"When the impostor who, under the name of American 
civilization, established the four hundred saloons in Manila 
gets his gambling-houses and all the other places of vice aiul 
crime which accompany or follow such a war in full and suc- 
cessful operation, he will be prepared to take off the mask. 



Nineteenth Century- 113 

He can then safely put to the victims of his guile the same 
terrible question asked by the unveiled prophet of Khoras- 
san of his deluded and astonished victim. 

"At the rate we are now going, Manila is likely to be- 
come in time as good a specimen of the civilization wrought 
by such a war as Calcutta, the capital of British India, after 
a commixture of 'criminal aggression' and 'benevolent assim- 
ilation' had been tried upon that country for generations. 
A distinguished English writer described that city as 'a gor- 
geous monument of rapine, a painted sepulchre of crime.' 

"Christ prayed that His disciples might all be one in 
Him and His Father : 'That the world may believe that thou 
hast sent me.' Similar reasoning will govern the modern 
world. When men see that the clergy are actuated by the 
spirit of Christ and governed by His precepts in all their 
ways, they will be prepared to accept a religion which bears 
such good fruits. 

"But you ask me when this will be. How long will the 
world have to wait till the evils and crimes of humanity will 
be ended by the universal acceptance and practice of the re- 
ligion of Christ? I answer, I cannot tell. I do not know. 
We must wait and see. It was forty centuries from the time 
Christ was promised till He came. He waited for the full- 
ness of time; waited till men had exhausted their plans; 
waited until the world was weary with attempting to con- 
quer human ills and human errors ; waited until the wisest 
philosophers had taught, until the most eloquent orators had 
spoken, until the strongest governments had tried their 
schemes; waited until Egypt had risen in learning and then 
sunk to ruin ; waited until Babylon and all her glory had per- 



114 TJw Great Trial of the 

islied, until Greece with all her philosophy and arts was a 
failure; waited until Rome seated on her seven hills, and 
grasping the known world, had gathered her poets, painters, 
and philosophers, and yet in the midst of her glory was rush- 
ing headlong to ruin, and poor humanity was uttering the 
cry, 'What must we do to be saved?' Then, when man could 
do no more, Christ came. 

"The world has waited since His advent nineteen hun- 
dred years to be conquered by His spirit and His precepts. 
No man knoweth how much longer it must wait. The times 
and seasons and the reason why we must wait are known 
only to God. He is His own interpreter, and He will make 
it plain. 

"But I think we have passed the sonship and childhood 
of Christianity — the age when it astonished by its miracle 
and wonders, when it simply stirred the intellectual powers 
of the world. We have reached the point where it has laid its 
hands upon the powers of the earth, and it is opening its 
heart of sympathy and taking in the lowest of the low — all 
forms of suffering and misfortune — and the next age that 
shall be developed is that of the Prince of Peace. I see the 
era coming. I see it in the proposals to arbitrate and in the 
efforts to avoid war. The age is coming when out of the heart 
of the everlasting Father shall be developed the reign of the 
Prince of Peace. Christ is to reign King of Kings and Lord 
of Lords; and as He reigns the sword shall be beaten into 
the plowshare and the spear into the pruning-hook, and men 
shall learn war no more. And when that age comes, of His 
dominion there shall be no end. He shall reign until the uni- 
verse shall crown Him Lord of all. 



Nineteenth Century. 115 

"The nations which ought to lead in this regeneration of 
our race are Great Britain and the United States, and I 
earnestly hope they will. And I fervently pray that the 
Boer and Philippine wars will be the last exhibitions which 
these nations will ever give of the rapacity which they inher- 
ited from their heathen ancestors. Their privileges and 
blessings have been greater than those of any other nations, 
and their obligations to God and humanity are greater. 

"I think they will realize this more and more from year 
to year, and I hope that ere long they will awake to a con- 
sciousness of the wrongs they have inflicted upon those un- 
fortunate peoples, restore all their rights to them, atone, as 
far as possible, for all the evil they have done them, and be 
forgiven. Even the author or authors of the war against the 
Filipinos, who have caused so much intemperance, disease. 
Insanity, and the slaughter of so many thousand men; even 
they, stained as they are, with so much blood unrighteously 
shed, may be forgiven. The Great Prophet assures us that 
'though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be white as snow; 
though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool.' Even 
wholesale murder may be forgiven. 

''In that noble passage from Isaiah which I read in open- 
ing this discourse it is said of Christ : 'He shall see the trav- 
ail of his soul and be satisfied.' He could not be satisfied 
without the salvation from slavery and sin and want of all 
the race He died to save. Every continent and every island 
of the sea shall be redeemed. Ethiopia shall stretch out her 
hands to God. And the dark continent of Africa, so long 
the prey of the white man, shall be lighted up by the Sun of 
Righteousness, who shall shine upon all her deserts, and in 



116 The Great Trial of the 

all her waste places, and o'er all her blood-stained fields, 
with healing in His beams, for all her woes. 

"But though men are to be saved and the world is to be 
redeemed and regenerated, you are not to infer that either 
individuals or nations can escape the natural consequences 
of their evil deeds. Christ came to save His people from 
their sins, not from the consequences of their evil deeds. 
These were interwoven by the Creator in the very frame- 
work of the universe, and can neither be avoided nor escaped. 
The evils that men do live after them, and cannot be undone. 
The forty thousand men who have been slaughtered in this 
lamentable Philippine War cannot be restored to life. 

"The thousands of maimed bodies and ruined constitu- 
tions will remain maimed and ruined. The enormous cost of 
the war must be paid by the people. The intemperance, prof- 
ligacy, corruption, and other evils caused by it will continue 
long after the present conflict is ended. And the disgrace of 
making such a war will endure as long as the history of the 
nation. 

"I entreat my countrymen, and also my countrywomen, 
who have suffered so long and so much from this curse, and 
I implore all of my brethren and sisters of the Chris- 
tian Church, of all denominations, to use all their influence 
to put a final end to this greatest scourge of the human race. 
I assure the young men of my country that it is a great de- 
lusion to suppose that honor or glory can be acquired in an 
unjust or an unnecessary war. Such a war, no matter how 
successful it may be, is a disgrace and shame. Nothing but 
righteousness exalteth a nation, and nothing but sin is a dis- 
grace to any people. If the young men of this country 



Nineteenth Century. il'^ 

would win true and lasting honor and glory, let them engage 
in a bloodless contest with war itself and fight it to the end. 
''The Great Apostle tells us that 'one star excelleth an- 
other in glory.' In the celestial world of the future, his star 
shall be the brightest who has done the most to put war and 
all the enemies of our race under the feet of the Prince of 
Peace. The glory of Sirius, that matchless star that now 
shines nightly above us, is material and transitory. But the 
glory of the men who spend their lives in the regeneration 
and redemption of mankind will continue to shine, with un- 
diminished radiance, after the material heavens have been 
rolled together as a scroll and the elements have melted with 
fervent heat. 

"I should rejoice if, in closing this discussion, I could 
inspire this audience with the confidence which I feel in the 
future. I have an abiding faith in the abolition of war and 
the redemption of man. I shall not live to see it, but it will 
come before the close of the next century, and maybe before 
the end of the next generation. 

"The present fearful demoralization in church and state 
will pass away. The craze in favor of war will be followed 
by a reaction in favor of peace. In 1854 slavery, the next 
evil in magnitude to war, seemed stronger than ever before. 
In ten years it was abolished. The means taken to extend 
and perpetuate it hastened its destruction. So it will be 
with war. This miserable Boer and Philippine business will 
so extend and strengthen the abhorrence of war throughout 
the world as to compel the nations to abolish it. 

"Some of you, perhaps, fear the spirit of unrest that per- 
vades the nations. Fear not. The spirit you see moving on 



1 1 8 TJie Great Trial of the 

the face of the troubled waters is a benign and not an evil 
spirit. The ear of faith can hear it repeating those words of 
hope and encouragement uttered long ago upon a stormy 
sea: 'Be of good cheer. It is I. Be not afraid.' 

"As I close this address the predictions of prophets and 
songs of poets foretelling and describing the blissful reign 
of Messiah seem to crowd my memory. I give you in con- 
clusion a few cheering and inspiring lines from one of them : 

" 'No more shall nation against nation rise, 
Nor ardent warriors meet with hateful eyes: 
Nor fields with gleaming steel be covered o'er, 
The brazen trumpets kindle rage no more; 
But useless lances into scythes shall bend, 
And the broad falchion in a ploughshare end. 
All crimes shall cease, and ancient fraud shall fail: 
Returning Justice lift aloft her scale, 
Peace o'er the world her olive wand extend 
And white robed Innocence from heaven descend. 
No more the rising sun shall gild the morn. 
Nor evening Cynthia fill her silver horn : 
But lost, dissolved in thy superior rays, 
One tide of glory, one unclouded blaze, 
O'erflow thy courts: The Light Himself shall shine 
Revealed, and God's eternal day be thine! 
The seas shall waste, the skies in smoke decay. 
Rocks fall to dust and mountains melt away; 
But fixed His word, His saving power remains. 
Thy Realm forever lasts, thy own Messiah reigns.' " 



Nineteenth Century. 119 



CONCLUSION. 

The speech of Bishop Simpson occupied nearly an hour 
in the delivery. I have given the substance of it, but very 
imperfectly. The presence and manner of the speaker added 
much to the effect of it, and the fact of his long and intimate 
personal and political friendship for Mr. Lincoln added 
more. He held the undivided attention of the entire audi- 
ence and the effect of his address was evidently very great. 

After the Bishop closed, Mr. Clay took the platform 
and offered a series of resolutions for adoption by the meet- 
ing — declaring that the war against the Filipinos was un- 
justly and unconstitutionally begun by the President — that 
they were the owners of their own country and had a right 
to freedom and independence and self-government, and that 
no nation had a right to force any form of government upon 
them against their own consent. And requesting Congress 
to put an immediate stop to the war, and the President to 
enter promptly into a treaty of peace with the Filipinos 
upon the basis of their freedom and independence. 

He explained each resolution briefly, and then for a few 
minutes addressed the meeting, urging their unanimous 
adoption. It was the most eloquent speech I ever heard. His 
appeal to those who professed to be followers of Christ was 
irresistible. He stated that he was himself a member of a 
Christian church, and that he expected soon to stand before 
the judgment-seat of Christ, and there to meet the inhabit- 
ants of those islands, who had been persecuted so long by 
professedly Christian men. 



120 The Great Trial of tJie 

He wished to meet them feeling that his garments were 
not stained with their blood. In that awful presence he 
wished to know that his robe was white and pure, and he 
appealed to all his hearers to so Tote now and act hereafter 
that they could feel, in the presence of their final Judge, that 
they had done their whole duty to these unfortunate peoijle 
and all others. 

The effect of this speech was shown in the vote upon the 
resolutions. It seemed to be the unanimous voice of twenty 
thousand people. It seemed to pierce the roof of the build- 
ing, and to reach the very throne of the Almighty Power be- 
fore whom Mr. Clay had summoned his audience. 

The noise awoke me from my long sleep. The great 
auditorium, the vast audience, the tall commanding form of 
the speaker, the sad earnest face of Mr. Lincoln, the benign 
countenance of Bishop Simpson, the majestic form of Wash- 
ington — the whole wonderful scene in which I had been en- 
tranced for so many hours faded away and left nothing be- 
hind but the remembrance of a dream. 



Nineteenth Gentunj. 121 

APPENDIX. 

Note to Bishop Simpson's sermon (taken from the Liter- 
ary Digest for March, 1900). 

a* * * Regret is expressed by several papers for the 
state of affairs pictured in a number of reports from the 
Philippines, which seem to agree that there is an immense 
amount of drunkenness among the Americans there. Presi- 
dent Schurman, of the Philippine Commission, it will be re- 
membered, said publicly soon after his return to this coun- 
try: 'I regret that Americans have been allowed to estab- 
lish saloons in the Philippines, for the Filipinos are a tem- 
perate people, and the sight of an intoxicated American dis- 
gusts them. Nothing has done so much damage to the repu- 
tation of the American people as this.' Captain Frank M. 
Wells, chaplain of the First Regiment of Tennessee Volun- 
teers, who describes himself as 'an Administration man 
clear through,' said in an address in Washington, February 
11th, that 'before the American troops entered Manila there 
were only three saloons in the city, and that in each only 
soft drinks were sold; but that now there are four hundred 
saloons, selling whisky. And the drunkenness seems to be 
as bad afloat as ashore.' He said : 

" 'While on board one of the transports to Cebu, I found 
that liquor-selling was the same as on the other transports. 
I tried to have it stopped, but failed. I took special care of 
the men in my regiment, with the determination that if I 
could not save their souls, I would at least get them to hell 
sober. I never saw so much liquor on a Mississippi steam- 
boat, and I have traveled on a good many, as I saw on the 
transport Sheridan the last three days we were in Cebu.' 



122 The Great Trial of the 

"Similar testimony was given a few weeks ago by Lieu- 
tenant E. Hearne, of the Fifty-first Iowa Volunteers, who had 
just returned from Manila. In an address in New York City 
he said: 

"The Filipinos, while pagans and semi-civilized, are 
moral and sober. They first learn of Christianity from the 
profane sailor, and when they see immense numbers of 
drunken, profane, and immoral soldiers representing this 
country, they have little respect for the religion they profess. 
*If that is your religion,' they say, 'we prefer our own.' The 
soldier, when associated with others, loses his identity. 
Then his savage and lower nature displays itself. This is 
particularly true of the soldier in the Philippines, idle under 
a tropical sun. He loses all his religion. It is our duty first 
to send out Christian soldiers if we expect to make any sort 
of impression on the people there.' 

"Mr. W. B. Miller, who has charge of the Army and Navy 
work of the Young Men's Christian Association, said in an 
address at the same meeting: 

" 'So great was the effect of the drunkenness and irrev- 
erence of the American soldier in the Philippines that one 
man, writing to me from Manila, said that two missionaries 
gave up their work among the natives and went to work on 
the army. They realized the uselessness of their work when 
there was an immoral and drunken army representing this 
country on hand. One drunken soldier can do more evil than 
two missionaries can undo. The sending of whisky and 
questionable things to Manila is not a badge of honor for this 
country.' 



'Nineteenth Century. 123 

"The latest report from Manila on this phase of expan- 
sion comes from Mr. H. Irving Hancock, Manila correspond- 
ent of Leslie's Weehly, who says : 

" 'Of all the problems that confront us in the reconstruc- 
tion of the Philippines, the gravest and wickedest is one of 
our own importation. The Manila saloons, taken collectively, 
are the worst possible kind of a blot on Uncle Sam's fair 
name. The city's air reeks with the odors of the worst of 
English liquors. And all this has come to pass since the 
13th day of August, 1898! * * * * To-day there is no 
thoroughfare of length in Manila that has not its long line 
of saloons. The street-cars carry flaunting advertisements of 
this brand of whisky and that kind of gin. The local papers 
derive their main revenue from the displayed advertisements 
of firms and companies eager for their share of Manila's 
drink-money. The city presents to the new-comer a Satur- 
nalia of alcoholism. * * * 

" 'I do not mean this as a tirade against all saloons. It 
is only a much-needed protest against the worst features of 
the American saloon that have crept into Manila arm in arm 
with our boasted progress. There is nowhere in the world 
such an excessive amount of drinking, per capita, as among 
the few thousand Americans at present living in Manila. 
Nor does this mean that we have sent the worst dregs of 
Americanism there. Far from it ; some of the best American 
blood is represented in Manila. There are men of brains and 
attainment there, who would nobly hold up our name were it 
not for the saloon at every step. Gamblers and depraved 
women — in both classes the very dregs of this and other 
countries — have followed, and work hand in hand with their 



1^4 The Great Trial of the 

natural ally. These people are fast teaching the natives the 
depths of Caucasian wickedness, and the natives imagine it 
is Americanism. * « * * 

" 'Chairman Schurmau of the Philippine Commission 
voices his regret that the American saloon was ever permit- 
ted to make its advent in Manila. Well may he regret it, as 
may every other American too who has been in Manila dur- 
ing the past year. It is a great mistake to suppose that 
every officer, soldier, and sailor in the Philippines is drinking 
to excess, but some of them do, and the same is true of a 
great percentage of the civilians. The native is not discrim- 
inating, and attributes this vice to all Americans. If sa- 
loons were carefully and honestly restricted in number and 
put under the rigid regulations that decency requires, this 
shame of Uncle Sam would quickly vanish. It is the glar- 
ing opportunity for drunkenness that does so much harm. 

" 'So far as my observation went, I found that the mili- 
tary authorities of Manila were not on record as having done 
anything to abate this crying disgrace. Indeed, one Ameri- 
can officer, fairly high in the councils at the palace, is the 
putative head of the concern that is doing the most to en- 
courage and supply the thirst of Manila. We tried to civil- 
ize the Indian, and incidentally wiped him off the earth by 
permitting disreputable white traders to supply him with ar- 
dent liquors. Are we to repeat this disgrace tenfold, as we 
at present seem fair to do, in the Philippines?' " 

"A Crime Against a People. — The American soldiers, how- 
ever, might drink themselves into death or idiocy, and it 
would be of less ultimate consequence than the simple fact 
of the introduction of the liquor traffic into the Philippine 



Nineteenth Century. 125 

Islands. In one respect, at least, the civilization of the Filip- 
inos was superior to our own, and that was in the use of in- 
toxicating drinks. All travelers have testified to their tem- 
jjerateness and their very slight use of intoxicants. Our first 
step has been to flood their towns and cities with whisky, 
and thus break down a conspicuous native virtue. For this 
liquor curse must remain in the Philippines long after the 
bulk of the American army has been withdrawn. It is the 
experience in all tropical countries that the whisky habit, 
once it secures a foot-hold, is difficult to extirpate. Whisky 
is a great decimater of tropical populations. 

''The seriousness of the crime thus committed must be 
confessed by the Government itself, since, in its view, the 
Filipinos must be regarded as children. What would the 
world think of a nation that deliberately or heedlessly led 
millions of children into the liquor habit for the sake of 
profit? It is certainly remarkable that the Government, 
while regarding the Filipinos as children in their political 
capacity to govern themselves, should regard them as thor- 
oughly mature in their capacity to govern their physical ap- 
petites. The Government has been extremely solicitous not 
to grant the Filipinos self-rule in political affairs, yet it has 
left them the prey of American rum-sellers in social affairs. 

"One does not need to be a prohibitionist in the United 
States to believe that the sudden and unrestrained intro- 
duction of the liquor traffic into a country where it had 
never before existed was a crime against heaven and earth. 
The traffic could have been forbidden at the outset by one 
man; it could be forbidden to-day by one man, because the 



126 The Great Trial of the 

whole archipelago is under martial law." — The Springfield 
Republican. 



Extract from a speech delivered at a great public dinner 
given to Mr. Webster at Philadelphia, on the 2d of Decem- 
ber, 1846, on the ''War Power." 

a* * * gy^ ^jjg annexation was completed. The 
western boundary was a matter about which disputes exist- 
ed or must arise. There was, as between us and Mexico, as 
there had been between Texas and Mexico, no ascertained 
and acknowledged western boundary. 

"This was the state of things after the annexation of 
Texas, and when the President began military movements 
in that direction. Now, gentlemen, that I may misrepresent 
nobody, and say nothing which has not been clearly proved 
by official evidence, I will proceed to state to you three 
propositions, which, in my opinion, are fairly sustained by 
the correspondence of the government in its various branches 
and departments, as officially communicated to Congress. 

"First — That the President directed the occupation of a 
territory by force of arms, to which the United States had 
no ascertained title; a territory which, if claimed by the 
United States, was also claimed by Mexico, and was at the 
time in her actual occupation and possession. 

"The Texan convention was to assemble July 4, 1845, 
to pass upon the annexation. Before this date, to-wit, on 
the 28th day of May, General Taylor was ordered to move to- 
wards Texas; and on the 15th day of June he was instructed 
by a letter from Mr. Bancroft to enter Texas and concentrate 



Nineteenth Century. 127 

his forces on its 'western boundary,' and to select and oc- 
cupy a position 'on or near the Rio Grande, to protect what, 
in the event of annexation, will be our western border.' 

"That the United States had no ascertained title to the 
territory appears from Mr. Marcy's letter to General Taylor 
of July 30, 1845. General Taylor is there informed that 
what he is to 'occupy, defend, and protect' is 'the territory 
of Texas, to the extent that it has been occupied by the peo- 
ple of Texas.' It appears in the dispatch last quoted, that 
this territory had been occupied by Mexico. 

"Mr. Marcy goes on to say : 'The Rio Grande is claimed 
to be the boundary between the two countries, and up to this 
boundary you are to extend your protection, only excepting 
any posts on the eastern side thereof w^hich are in the actual 
occupancy of Mexican forces, or Mexican settlements over 
which the republic of Texas did not exercise jurisdiction at 
the period of annexation, or shortly before that event.' 

"This makes it perfectly clear that the United States had 
neither an ascertained nor an apparent title to this territory ; 
for it admits that Texas only made a claim to it, Mexico hav- 
ing an adverse claim, and having also actual possession. 

"Second — That as early as July, 1845, the President knew 
as well as others acquainted with the subject, that this terri- 
tory was in the actual possession of Mexico; that it con- 
tained Mexican settlements, over which Texas had not exer- 
cised jurisdiction, up to the time of annexation. 

"On the 8th of July the Secretary of War wrote to 
General Taylor that 'this department is informed that 
Mexico has some military establishments on the east side of 



128 The Great Trial of the 

the Rio Grande, which are, and for some time have been, in 
the actual occupancy of her troops.' On the 30th of July 
the Secretary wrote as already mentioned, directing General 
Taylor to except from his protection 'any posts on the 
eastern side thereof [of the Kio Grande] which are in the 
actual occupancy of Mexican forces, or Mexican settlements 
over which the republic of Texas did not exercise jurisdic- 
tion at the period of annexation, or shortly before that 
event.' 

"It manifestly appears to have been the intention of the 
President, from the 28th day of May down to the consumma- 
tion of his purpose, to take possession of this territory by 
force of arms, however unwilling Mexico might be to yield 
it, or whatever might turn out on examination to be her right 
to retain it. He intended to extinguish the Mexican title by 
force; otherwise his acts and instructions are inexplicable. 

"The government maintained from the first, that the Bio 
Grande was the western boundary of Texas, as appears from 
the letters to General Taylor of the 28th day of May and 15th 
day of June, 1845. On the 15th day of June, General Taylor 
was instructed to take such a position 'on or near the Kio 
Grande' as 'will be best to repel invasion and protect what, 
in the event of annexation, will be our western boundary.' 
In accordance with these are also the instructions of July 
30th, to which I have already referred. 

"On the 6th day of August the Secretary wrote to Gen- 
eral Taylor: 'Although a state of war with Mexico or an in- 
vasion of Texas by her forces may not take place, it is, never- 
theless, deemed proper and necessary that your force should 



Nineteenth Century. 129 

be fully equal to meet witli certainty of success any crisis 
which may arise in Texas, and which would require you by 
force -of arms to carry out the instructions of the gov- 
ernment.' He is then, in the same letter, authorized to pro- 
cure volunteers from Texas. On the. 23d day of August the 
Secretary instructed General Taylor thus: 'Should Mexico 
assemble a large body of troops on the Rio Grande, and 
cross it with a considerable force, such a movement must be 
regarded as an invasion of the United States and the com- 
mencement of hostilities.' He is then instructed how to as- 
semble a large force. On the 30th day of August he was in- 
structed, in case any Mexican force crossed the Rio Grande, 
'to drive all Mexican troops beyond it'; that any attempt by 
the Mexicans to cross the river with a considerable force 
would be regarded as an invasion; and that on such an 
event, namely, 'in case of war, either declared or made mani- 
fest by hostile acts,' he was not to confine his action within 
the territory of Texas. On the 16th day of October the Secre- 
tary wrote that 'the information which we have here ren- 
ders it probable that no serious attempt will, at present, be 
made by Mexico to invade Texas.' But General Taylor is 
still instructed to hold the country between the Nueces and 
the Rio Grande. 'Previous instructions will have put you 
in possession of the views of the government of the United 
States, not only as to the extent of its territorial claims, but 
of its determination to assert them.' 

"He is directed to put his troops into winter quarters, ac- 
cordingly, as near the Rio Grande as circumstances will per- 
mit. Up to this time and to the 11th day of March, 1846, 
General Taylor was at Corpus Christi. The open and de- 



1 30 The Great Trial of the 

cided step was taken on the 13tli day of January. On that 
day the Secretary of War directed General Taylor to march 
to the Rio Grande and to take up a position opposite Mata- 
moras. He is instructed, in so doing, in case Mexico should 
declare war, or commit any open act of hostility, not to act 
merely on the defensive. Throughout the correspondence it 
is plain that the intention was to extinguish the Mexican ti- 
tle to this territory by armed occupation; and the instruc- 
tions are explicit, to treat every assertion of title or move- 
ment on the part of Mexico as an act of hostility and to pro- 
ceed accordingly and resist it. 

"To show how Gen. Taylor understood the instructions 
of his government, it may be observed that on the 2d day of 
March, thirty miles from Matamoras, at a stream called the 
Arroyo Colorado, he was met by a party of Mexicans, whose 
commanding officer informed him that if he crossed the 
stream, it would be deemed a declaration of war, and put in- 
to his hand a copy of General Mejias's proclamation to that 
effect. Notwithstanding this. General Taylor put his forces 
in order of battle, crossed the stream, and pushed on, the 
Mexicans retreating. He arrived on the Rio Grande, oppo- 
site Matamoras, on the 29th day of March. 

"Let me now ask your attention to an extract from a let- 
ter from Mr. Buchanan to Mr. Slidell, of January 20, 1846. 
In this letter Mr. Buchanan says: 

" 'In the mean time the President, in anticipation of the 
final refusal of the Mexican government to receive you, has 
ordered the Army of Texas to advance and take position on 
the left bank of the Rio Grande; and has directed that 



Nineteenth Century. 131 

a strong fleet shall be immediately assembled in the Gulf of 
Mexico. He will thus be prepared to act with vigor and 
promptitude the moment that Congress shall give him the 
authority.' 

''Now, if, by this advance of troops, possession would L^ 
taken on the extreme line claimed by us, what furth. 
vigorous action did the President expect Congress to auth( - 
ize? Did he expect Congress to make a general declaration 
of war? Congress was then in session. Why not consult it? 
Why take a step not made necessary by any pressing danger, 
and which might naturally lead to war, without requiring 
the authority of Congress in advance? With Congress is the 
power of peace and war; to anticipate its decision by the 
adoption of measures leading to war is nothing less than an 
executive interference with the legislative power. Nothing 
but the necessity of self-defense could justify the sending of 
troops into a territory claimed and occupied by a power with 
which at that time no war existed. And there was, I think, 
no case of such necessity of self-defence. Mr. Slidell replied 
to Mr. Buchanan on the 17th day of February, saying: 'The 
advance of General Taylor's force to the left bank of the Eio 
Grande and the strengthening of our squadron in the Gulf 
are wise measures, which may exercise a salutary influence 
upon the course of this government.' 

"The army was thus ordered to the extreme limits of our 
claim; to our utmost boundary, as asserted by ourselves; and 
here it was to be prepared to act further, and to act with 
promptitude and vigor. Now, it is a very significant inquiry, 
'Did the President mean by this to bring on, or to run the 
risk of bringing on, a general war?' Did he expect to be 



132 The Great Trial of the 

authorized by Congress to prosecute a general war of in- 
vasion and acquisition? I repeat the question, Why not 
take the opinion of Congress, it then being in session, before 
any war-lilie movement was made? Mr, Buchanan's letter is 
of the 20th day of January. The instructions to march to 
the Eio Grande had been given on the 13th. Congress was 
in session all this time; and why should, and why did, the 
executive take so import-ant a step, not necessary for self- 
defence and leading to immediate war, without the authority 
of Congress? This is a grave question and well deserves an 
answer, 

"Allow me to repeat, for it is a matter of history, that be- 
fore and at the time when these troops were ordered to the 
left bank of the Rio Grande there was no danger of invasion 
by Mexico or apprehension of hostilities by her. This is per- 
fectly evident from General Taylor's letters to the govern- 
ment through the jjreceding summer and down to the time 
the orders were given, 

"I now refer to these letters. 

"On the 15th day of August, General Taylor writes : *In 
regard to the force at other points on the Rio Grande, except 
the militia of the country, I have no information; nor do I 
hear that the reported concentration at Matamoras is for any 
purpose of invasion.' On the 20th day of August he says: 
'Caravans of traders arrive occasionally from the Rio 
Grande, but bring no news of importance. They represent 
that there are no regular troops on that river except at Mata- 
moras, and do not seem to be aware of any preparations for 
a demonstration on this bank of the river.' On the 6th day 



Nineteenth Century. 133 

of September he writes thus: 'I have the honor to report 
that a confidential agent, despatched some days since to 
MatamoraSj has returned and reports that no extraordinary 
preparations are going forward there; that the garrison doe-? 
not seem to have been increased, and that our consul is of 
the opinion that there will be no declaration of war.' On 
the 11th day of October he says: 'Recent arrivals from the 
Rio Grande bring no news or information of a different as- 
pect from that which I reported in my last. The views ex- 
pressed in previous communications relative to the pacific 
disposition of the border people on both sides of the river are 
continually confirmed.' This was the last dispatch, I pre- 
sume, received by the War Department before giving the 
order of January 13th for the march of the army. 

"A month after the order of march had been given all 
General Taylor's previous accounts were confirmed by him. 
On the 16th day of February he thus writes to the Adjutant- 
General at Washington : 'Many reports will doubtless reach 
the Department giving exaggerated accounts of Mexican pre- 
parations to resist our advance, if not indeed to attempt an 
invasion of Texas. Such reports have been circulated even 
at this place, and owe their origin to personal interests con- 
nected with the stay of the army here. I trust they will re- 
ceive no attention at the War Department. From the best 
information I am able to obtain, and which I deem as authen- 
tic as any, I do not believe that our advance to the banks of 
the Rio Grande will be resisted. The army, however, will go 
fully prepared for a state of hostilities, should they unfor- 
tunately be provoked by the Mexicans.' 

"This oflflcial correspondence proves, I think, that there 



134 The Great Trial of the 

was no danger of invasion or of hostilities of any kind 
from Mexico at the time of the march of the army. It must, 
in fact, be plain to everybody that the ordering of the army 
to the Rio Grande was a step naturally, if not necessarily, 
tending to provoke hostilities and to bring on war. I shall 
use no inflammatory or exciting language, but it seems to me 
that this whole proceeding is against the spirit of the Consti- 
tution and the just limitations of the different departments 
of the government; an act pregnant with serious conse- 
quences and of dangerous precedent to the public liberties. 

''No power but Congress can declare war. But what is 
the value of this constitutional provision if the President of 
his own authority may make such military movements as 
must bring on war? If the war power be in Congress, then 
everything tending directly or naturally to bring on war 
should be referred to the discretion of Congress. Was this 
order of march given in the idle hope of coercing Mexico to 
treat? If so, idle it was, as the event proved. But it was 
something worse than a mistake or a blunder; it was, as it 
seems to me, an extension of executive authority of a very 
dangerous character. I see no necessity for it and no apol- 
ogy for it, since Congress was in session at the same moment 
at the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue, and might have 
been consulted." 



Nineteenth Century. 135 



Extracts from a speech of Mr. Clay in the House of 
Kepresentatives March 24, 1818, on his motion providing 
for a minister to the United Provinces of Rio de la Plata. 

This speech contains the true, well-settled American 
doctrine, against which the United States is fighting in the 
Philippine Islands. 

****** u-g^^ I ^a]^g jj broader and a bolder po- 
sition. I maintain that an oppressed people are authorized, 
whenever they can, to rise and to break their fetters. This 
was the great principle of the English Revolution. It was 
the great principle of our own. Vattel, if authority were 
wanting, expressly supports this right. We must pass sen- 
tence of condemnation upon the founders of our liberty, say 
that they were rebels, traitors, and that we are at this mo- 
ment legislating v/ithout competent powers, before we can 
condemn the cause of Spanish America. Our Revolution was 
mainly directed against the mere theory of tyranny. We had 
suffered comparatively but little; we had, in some respects, 
been kindly treated; but our intrepid and intelligent fathers 
saw, in the usurpation of the power to levy an inconsider- 
able tax, the long train of oppressive acts that were to fol- 
low. They rose, they breasted the storm, they achieved our 
freedom. Spanish America for centuries has been doomed 
to the practical effects of an odious tyranny. If we were jus- 
tified, she is more than justified." 

"I am no propagandist. I would not seek to force upon 
other nations our principles and our liberty if they did -.not 



136 The Great Trial of the 

want tbem. I would not disturb the repose even of a de- 
testable despotism. But if an abused and oppressed people 
will their freedom; if they seek to establish it; if, in truth, 
they have established it — we have a right, as a sovereign 
power, to notice the fact, and to act as circumstances and 
our interest require. I will say, in the language of the ven- 
erated father of my country, 'Born in a land of liberty, my 
anxious recollections, my sympathetic feelings, and my best 
wishes are irresistibly excited, whensoever, in any country, 
I see an oppressed nation unfurl the banners of freedom.' 
Whenever I think of Spanish America, the image irresistibly 
forces itself upon my mind of an elder brother whose educa- 
tion has been neglected, whose person has been abused and 
maltreated, and who has been disinherited by the unkindness 
of an unnatural parent. And when I contemplate the 
glorious struggle which that country is now making, I think 
I behold that brother rising by the power and energy of his 
fine native genius to the manly rank which Nature and Na- 
ture's God intended for him." ********* 

"The independence of Spanish America, then, is an 
interest of primary consideration. Next to that, and highly 
important in itself, is the consideraton of the nature of their 
governments. That is a question, however, for themselves. 
They will, no doubt, adopt those kinds of government which 
are best suited to their condition, best calculated for their 
happiness. Anxious as I am that they should be free govern- 
ments, we have no right to prescribe for them. They are, 
and ought to be, the sole judges for themselves. I am 
strongly inclined to believe that they will in most, if not all 
parts of their country, establish free governments. We are 



Nineteenth Century. 137 

their great example. Of us they constantly speak as of 
brothers, having a similar origin. They adopt our princi- 
ples, copy our institutions, and, in many instances, employ 
the very language and sentiments of our revolutionary 
papers. 

''But it is sometimes said that they are too ignorant and 
too superstitious to admit of the existence of free govern- 
ment. This charge of ignorance is often urged by persons 
themselves actually ignorant of the real condition of that 
people. I deny the alleged fact of ignorance; I deny the in- 
ference from that fact, if it were true, that they want capac- 
ity for free government; and I refuse to assent to the fur- 
ther conclusion, if the fact were true and the inference just, 
that we are to be indifferent to their fate." 

****** "The fact is not therefore true, that 
the imputed ignorance exists; but, if it do, I repeat, I dispute 
the inference. It is the doctrine of thrones, that man is too 
ignorant to govern himself. Their partisans assert his in- 
capacity in reference to all nations; if they can not command 
universal assent to the proposition, it is then demanded as 
to particular nations, and our pride and our presumption too 
often make converts of us. I contend that it is to arraign 
the dispositions of Providence himself to suppose that He 
has created beings incapable of governing themselves and to 
be trampled on by kings. Self-government is the natural 
government of man, and for proof I refer to the aborigines 
of our own land." ****** 



